Archos's comments

Archos · on Jan 27, 2012

But the great disadvantage of those compilers (CoffeeScript and ClojureScript) is that the generated code doesn't matches up with the lines of the source code so its debugging is much more difficult.

gtrak · on Jan 27, 2012

Knowing no javascript, I didn't have a hard time debugging my first try at compiled-to-js clojurescript. It's pretty easy to see the naming correlations and conventions used by the compiler in the generated source.

Archos · on Jan 26, 2012

I prefer a sintaxis more expressive, concise and clean like Go's:

  package main

  type Foo struct {
	a, b, c int
  }

  func (f *Foo) bar(x int) int {
	return f.a + f.b + f.c + x
  }

  func main() {
	afoo := Foo{1, 2, 3}
	afoo.bar(3)
  }

Archos · on Jan 27, 2012

If I've said that one, it is because there is a compiler from Go to JavaScript under (advanced) development with several advantages over another compilers:

+ The lines numbers in the unminified generated JavaScript match up with the lines numbers in the original source file.

+ Generates minimized JavaScript.

+ Allows many type errors to be caught early in the development cycle, due to static typing.

https://github.com/kless/GoScript