

Show HN: Chocolate.js, Live Web Ide and Framework - jclevy
https://github.com/jclevy/chocolatejs

======
btipling
I'm going to just always flag CoffeeScript libraries that get posted with a
.js extention. It is too much effort to put into looking at something only to
find out it's not what you thought it was. I don't look at Clojure or Rails
posts because I am not interested in them, but somehow I just can't avoid
CoffeeScript. So I'm flagging.

~~~
jashkenas
Gee, that's a bit intolerant, isn't it? Do you similarly flag all Clojure and
Rails posts on HN, because you're just not interested?

~~~
btipling
No, because they don't pretend to be something I'm interested in.

~~~
jclevy
But would my project Chocolate interest you if its source code was written
directly in javascript?

~~~
btipling
Your project is interesting, and you put a great deal of work into it and it
is pretty much amazing. I generally don't care about what language an app I
use was written in. What has gotten under my skin is the naming of things that
are not JavaScript yet still get a .js extension.

I'm actually sorry that all of your hard work is buried under a discussion
about the .js extension. I just felt the need to vent as it keeps happening.
Your demo is very impressive.

~~~
jclevy
Thank you. Chocolate is the project name, but I had to add something at the
end to create a web site and a visible github project. So js was the shortest
and closest meaningfull suffix that came to my mind.

~~~
btipling
For what it's worth there's already Chocolat.app which is a text editor for
Macs. :/

------
olalonde
I really wish Coffeescript frameworks would stop calling themselves
Javascript. Why not Chocolate.coffee instead?

~~~
jclevy
You are right. However Javascript is apparent and supported in the Ide and as
I use Coffeescript an Javascript as a pair of programming languages, I called
it Chocolate.js

~~~
btipling
I would probably dislike CoffeeScript a lot less if I didn't keep running into
CoffeeScript examples on *.js libraries. CoffeeScript has made things worse
for JavaScript developers, not better, because it's everywhere now and I have
even seen libraries written in JavaScript provide only CoffeeScript examples!

Why can't they just be separate languages? Stop mixing them up. You don't see
Dart and JavaScript getting mixed up.

~~~
jashkenas
Because they're not separate languages. CoffeeScript and JavaScript share
semantics, making them trivially interoperable (unlike, for example, Dart).

Whether or not a library happens to be written in CoffeeScript is immaterial
to your use of it as a JavaScript developer. Now, if the _docs_ aren't good
enough because they don't cater to your preferred language reading choices,
then that's a legit beef, and it's a documentation deficiency that should be
fixed. No need for knee-jerk "dislike".

~~~
btipling
CoffeeScript is like a chameleon, conveniently a language when it serves its
proponents in an argument and not when it doesn't.

I propose that CoffeeScript is a language, complete and separate from
JavaScript and that people start treating it as such so people who prefer
readability over less typing don't have to deal with it if they don't want to.

------
FR6
Seem's interesting, I would like to see more screenshots of the IDE without
having to install it.

~~~
elisee
Yup, a short screencast or some screenshots would be great. Seeing as Windows
isn't a supported platform (yet?), I can't try it out right now without
rebooting and I could use some more convincing...

~~~
jclevy
I'll try to prepare a screecast in the following weeks. There is now a demo
there: <https://demo.chocolatejs.org/>

------
niggler
Is there a live demo or a screencast or more screenshots?

~~~
jclevy
There is now a non writable demo there : <https://demo.chocolatejs.org/>

~~~
zoop
This produces an untrusted site warning in Chrome

~~~
jclevy
Yes, the Demo site has a self-signed SSL certificate.

