Really? https://github.com/rails/rails/compare/9333ca7...23aa7da -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
The history of Rails has always been one of choosing a default, and being opinionated about it. While I''d prefer haml before coffeescript, I think it''s a perfectly reasonable choice for Rails to make. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
I don''t see how putting it in the Gemfile is a win. Anyone who wants coffeescript is perfectly capable of adding it themselves along with all the other gems they usually add to their projects. If they''re like me they just have a Gemfile they drop into any new project (or if they''re fancy then they''re using their own app template). So, no one can convince me that the experienced developer is the use-case for this choice. Any newbie will more than likely only know HTML, CSS and JS so will stick with editing ERB, CSS and JS files. They''ll just carry a useless coffee-script along with their app. So, doesn''t meet any need there either. So, I''m struggling to see the purpose of doing this at all. Is it as simple as giving coffeescript (and SASS) an official Rails stamp of approval? Do those of us who help total newbies in #ror and other forums a favor and please just leave it commented out. On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com>wrote:> The history of Rails has always been one of choosing a default, and being > opinionated about it. While I''d prefer haml before coffeescript, I think > it''s a perfectly reasonable choice for Rails to make. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
I prefer LESS over SASS, but I see SASS has improved since the last time I used it and taken some much needed pointers from LESS. I didn''t look into the SASS improvements enough to know if I''d choose it over LESS yet. coffeescript is interesting and if it''s the default now, it''ll finally give me an excuse to use it in practice instead of viewing it as fringe tech as I do now. These rails tech changes are fun to watch. I remember the move to git from svn... everybody had an opinion on that too. :) On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Jason King <jk@handle.it> wrote:> I don''t see how putting it in the Gemfile is a win. > Anyone who wants coffeescript is perfectly capable of adding it themselves > along with all the other gems they usually add to their projects. If > they''re like me they just have a Gemfile they drop into any new project (or > if they''re fancy then they''re using their own app template). So, no one can > convince me that the experienced developer is the use-case for this choice. > Any newbie will more than likely only know HTML, CSS and JS so will stick > with editing ERB, CSS and JS files. They''ll just carry a useless > coffee-script along with their app. So, doesn''t meet any need there either. > So, I''m struggling to see the purpose of doing this at all. Is it as simple > as giving coffeescript (and SASS) an official Rails stamp of approval? > Do those of us who help total newbies in #ror and other forums a favor and > please just leave it commented out. > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com> > wrote: >> >> The history of Rails has always been one of choosing a default, and being >> opinionated about it. While I''d prefer haml before coffeescript, I think >> it''s a perfectly reasonable choice for Rails to make. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. >> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
I really don''t see what the fuss is about. If you don''t like coffee- script then just write JavaScript. Right? On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Andrew Kaspick <akasp...@gmail.com> wrote:> I prefer LESS over SASS, but I see SASS has improved since the last > time I used it and taken some much needed pointers from LESS. I > didn''t look into the SASS improvements enough to know if I''d choose it > over LESS yet. > > coffeescript is interesting and if it''s the default now, it''ll finally > give me an excuse to use it in practice instead of viewing it as > fringe tech as I do now. > > These rails tech changes are fun to watch. I remember the move to git > from svn... everybody had an opinion on that too. :) > > > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Jason King <j...@handle.it> wrote: > > I don''t see how putting it in the Gemfile is a win. > > Anyone who wants coffeescript is perfectly capable of adding it themselves > > along with all the other gems they usually add to their projects. If > > they''re like me they just have a Gemfile they drop into any new project (or > > if they''re fancy then they''re using their own app template). So, no one can > > convince me that the experienced developer is the use-case for this choice. > > Any newbie will more than likely only know HTML, CSS and JS so will stick > > with editing ERB, CSS and JS files. They''ll just carry a useless > > coffee-script along with their app. So, doesn''t meet any need there either. > > So, I''m struggling to see the purpose of doing this at all. Is it as simple > > as giving coffeescript (and SASS) an official Rails stamp of approval? > > Do those of us who help total newbies in #ror and other forums a favor and > > please just leave it commented out. > > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Steve Klabnik <st...@steveklabnik.com> > > wrote: > > >> The history of Rails has always been one of choosing a default, and being > >> opinionated about it. While I''d prefer haml before coffeescript, I think > >> it''s a perfectly reasonable choice for Rails to make. > > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > >> For more options, visit this group at > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
Allam Marcos Campanini Matsubara
2011-Apr-15 04:59 UTC
Re: Re: Coffeescript in the default generator?
Sorry if my question is silly, but do I have the option to just purge coffescript if i do not want to use it? On 14 April 2011 12:54, Brandon <bemathis@gmail.com> wrote:> I really don''t see what the fuss is about. If you don''t like coffee- > script then just write JavaScript. Right? > > On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Andrew Kaspick <akasp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I prefer LESS over SASS, but I see SASS has improved since the last > > time I used it and taken some much needed pointers from LESS. I > > didn''t look into the SASS improvements enough to know if I''d choose it > > over LESS yet. > > > > coffeescript is interesting and if it''s the default now, it''ll finally > > give me an excuse to use it in practice instead of viewing it as > > fringe tech as I do now. > > > > These rails tech changes are fun to watch. I remember the move to git > > from svn... everybody had an opinion on that too. :) > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Jason King <j...@handle.it> wrote: > > > I don''t see how putting it in the Gemfile is a win. > > > Anyone who wants coffeescript is perfectly capable of adding it > themselves > > > along with all the other gems they usually add to their projects. If > > > they''re like me they just have a Gemfile they drop into any new project > (or > > > if they''re fancy then they''re using their own app template). So, no > one can > > > convince me that the experienced developer is the use-case for this > choice. > > > Any newbie will more than likely only know HTML, CSS and JS so will > stick > > > with editing ERB, CSS and JS files. They''ll just carry a useless > > > coffee-script along with their app. So, doesn''t meet any need there > either. > > > So, I''m struggling to see the purpose of doing this at all. Is it as > simple > > > as giving coffeescript (and SASS) an official Rails stamp of approval? > > > Do those of us who help total newbies in #ror and other forums a favor > and > > > please just leave it commented out. > > > > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Steve Klabnik < > st...@steveklabnik.com> > > > wrote: > > > > >> The history of Rails has always been one of choosing a default, and > being > > >> opinionated about it. While I''d prefer haml before coffeescript, I > think > > >> it''s a perfectly reasonable choice for Rails to make. > > > > >> -- > > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > >> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > > >> To post to this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > >> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com > . > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > > For more options, visit this group at > > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > >-- Allam Marcos Campanini Matsubara skype: allam.matsubara twitter: @allam_matsubara Phone: (41) 8847-8677 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
Yes you will. The only thing this change is talking about is the initial Gemfile that''s generated for you in a new app. On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Allam Marcos Campanini Matsubara < allam.matsubara@gmail.com> wrote:> Sorry if my question is silly, but do I have the option to just purge > coffescript if i do not want to use it? > > > On 14 April 2011 12:54, Brandon <bemathis@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I really don''t see what the fuss is about. If you don''t like coffee- >> script then just write JavaScript. Right? >> >> On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Andrew Kaspick <akasp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I prefer LESS over SASS, but I see SASS has improved since the last >> > time I used it and taken some much needed pointers from LESS. I >> > didn''t look into the SASS improvements enough to know if I''d choose it >> > over LESS yet. >> > >> > coffeescript is interesting and if it''s the default now, it''ll finally >> > give me an excuse to use it in practice instead of viewing it as >> > fringe tech as I do now. >> > >> > These rails tech changes are fun to watch. I remember the move to git >> > from svn... everybody had an opinion on that too. :) >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Jason King <j...@handle.it> wrote: >> > > I don''t see how putting it in the Gemfile is a win. >> > > Anyone who wants coffeescript is perfectly capable of adding it >> themselves >> > > along with all the other gems they usually add to their projects. If >> > > they''re like me they just have a Gemfile they drop into any new >> project (or >> > > if they''re fancy then they''re using their own app template). So, no >> one can >> > > convince me that the experienced developer is the use-case for this >> choice. >> > > Any newbie will more than likely only know HTML, CSS and JS so will >> stick >> > > with editing ERB, CSS and JS files. They''ll just carry a useless >> > > coffee-script along with their app. So, doesn''t meet any need there >> either. >> > > So, I''m struggling to see the purpose of doing this at all. Is it as >> simple >> > > as giving coffeescript (and SASS) an official Rails stamp of approval? >> > > Do those of us who help total newbies in #ror and other forums a favor >> and >> > > please just leave it commented out. >> > >> > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Steve Klabnik < >> st...@steveklabnik.com> >> > > wrote: >> > >> > >> The history of Rails has always been one of choosing a default, and >> being >> > >> opinionated about it. While I''d prefer haml before coffeescript, I >> think >> > >> it''s a perfectly reasonable choice for Rails to make. >> > >> > >> -- >> > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups >> > >> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. >> > >> To post to this group, send email to >> rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. >> > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > >> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> > >> For more options, visit this group at >> > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >> > >> > > -- >> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups >> > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. >> > > To post to this group, send email to >> rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> > > For more options, visit this group at >> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. >> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >> >> > > > -- > Allam Marcos Campanini Matsubara > > skype: allam.matsubara > twitter: @allam_matsubara > Phone: (41) 8847-8677 > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.