Take the 2-minute tour ×
Programmers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development. It's 100% free, no registration required.

TypeScript website offer the following D3 example is there any comparison of the same D3 codes for the following languages available:

  • CoffeeScript
  • TypeScript
  • JSX
  • Dart
  • Fantom

It would be interested to see which one is really easier to use?

Thank you in advance.

share|improve this question

closed as not a real question by Joachim Sauer, gnat, Martijn Pieters, World Engineer Mar 6 '13 at 12:04

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

    
Can you please edit the question to link to the example you are talking about? –  dan1111 Mar 6 '13 at 9:34
1  
I assume the example is typescriptlang.org/Samples/#D3. The link should be in the question, yes. Maybe even the code in data.ts should be copied in the question for quick reference. –  epidemian Mar 6 '13 at 9:38
    
Yes, epidemain is right. This is the example typescript.codeplex.com/SourceControl/changeset/view/… –  user977828 Mar 6 '13 at 10:36
1  
Hello and Welcome to Programmers. This question doesn't really have a definite answer as it will vary from person to person as to which is easier or more useful. Have a look at the faq if you would please. Have a pleasant day. –  World Engineer Mar 6 '13 at 12:05

1 Answer 1

up vote 16 down vote accepted

The short version:

CoffeeScript if you much prefer Python or Ruby-style syntax and you're uncomfortable with JS's uncomplicated approach to OOP

TypeScript if you actually like JavaScript and find the idea of using Microsoft's kludge for the problem their own browser versioning approach created appealing and maybe it's really only not having the word "class" that bothers you about JS's current uncomplicated approach to OOP

JSX if it's just dynamic types that horrify you and you're uncomfortable with JS's uncomplicated approach to OOP

Dart if like 99% of Google's Stanford grads, anything that doesn't look a lot more like Java and working without an IDE horrifies you and you're uncomfortable with JS's uncomplicated approach to OOP

...and finally Fantom if you've actually bothered to learn both kinds of languages, C# AND Java but can't be bothered to learn anything else and definitely can't be bothered to learn JS's uncomplicated approach to OOP

Obnoxious? Yes, okay, a little. Okay, maybe a lot. But how can we answer this question? I don't know what you like or find easy and that's basically the list of "problems" these down-compiled-to-js languages attempt to solve.

share|improve this answer
1  
Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself that JS approach to OOP is uncomplicated ;) –  jgauffin Apr 9 '13 at 4:55
3  
I've been convinced of that since I learned how OOP in JS works. –  Erik Reppen Apr 18 '13 at 22:10

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.