The conversion from CoffeeScript to JavaScript occurs on the server. The generated JavaScript is quite straight-forward for most cases.
CoffeeScript is more concise than JavaScript; it includes a couple of higher-order features, such as really smart loops, and smarter handling of function parameters; providing defaults, and handling extra arguments nicely. The -> and => syntax for defining functions is close to ideal for the web, where you constantly introduce new functions. Each module is automatically packaged up inside a hygienic function. All variables are declared before being used. CoffeeScript supports variable interpolation inside strings. However, if you want to replace a module (by contributing an override to the ModuleManager service), you can write that module is JavaScript or CoffeeScript. In fact, I haven't actually added support for CoffeeScript to the project; that will be a suggested add-on module that hasn't been written. Currently, the build is responsible for compiling CoffeeScript into JavaScript; what's getting packaged inside tapestry-core.jar is JavaScript. In the future, there will be a module that will detect the ".coffee" file extension, and convert that to JavaScript as needed, at runtime. Ive used CoffeeScript extensively over the last six months; I like it, I like how my code looks, I think the code is easier to follow and mantain. Brendan Eich thinks so too ... he's adapting idea from CoffeeScript (and from Python, and elsewhere) into the next-generation version of JavaScript. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:02:21 -0200, Paul Stanton <p...@mapshed.com.au> > wrote: > >> ok, our usage of the term 'monkey-patch' is where the misunderstanding is. >> I mean, patch. not monkey-patch, in your definition. > > > That's why I always told my students: use the right words, the right names, > the right terminologies all the times, because otherwise people won't > understand you. :) > > Monkey-patching in JavaScript and other dynamic-typed languages has a very > specific definition: changing some function by overriding it through code in > runtime. The source code is *not* changed. Patching, in the source code > sense, is something completely different, because it doesn't occur in > runtime, being done on the source itself. What you're doing is patching, but > not monkey-patching at all. > > According to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_patch: > > A monkey patch is a way to extend or modify the run-time code of dynamic > languages without altering the original source code. This process has also > been termed duck punching.[1] > > Regarding the gains of using CoffeeScript: I've never used it, so I cannot > answer that. > > > -- > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator of Apache Tapestry The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast! (971) 678-5210 http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
