On Tuesday, July 19, 2011 05:41:47 PM Alexey P. wrote:
UPD, this one seems to be interesting and is very active. And (a big
plus), it generates human readable js.
I remember starting a project like this. I more or less gave up when I
realized there didn’t seem to be a good way to have it continue to
human-readable JS, and also support continuations.
This seems to suffer from the same limitation. Notice there’s no
In MRI, I can do stuff like this:
ruby-1.9.2-p180 :010 > (1…10).each_cons(2).to_a
=> [[1, 2], [2, 3], [3, 4], [4, 5], [5, 6], [6, 7], [7, 8], [8, 9], [9,
Opal doesn’t do that – all of the enumerable methods (each and friends)
simply die if I don’t pass a block.
I guess if that ends up being the only edge case, and people are OK with
it makes sense. But it seems like the more weird corner cases like this,
less benefit there is to trying to pretend it’s a full-fledged Ruby.
your gems don’t hit any of the corner cases imposed by the interpreter
you’re still running in a restricted environment that may pose its own
Maybe it would be better to create a language specifically designed to
us Ruby-esque syntactic sugar, but to stick close enough that the
So, it looks really, really cool, but I think I’m still going to use
CoffeeScript if I use anything beyond pure JS.