Wow, plunker seems really nice. You really do make a strong case with the package catalogue. Some questions though: Would you consider adding automatic server-side proccessing in the future based on file-extension? For…
I'm actually hoping for a transition to a situation where your favorite web framework, will come with its own web-based IDE. Esspecially at the web-development side of things, IDE integration isn't optimal. It's not so…
Well, most of those use the ACE editor component, rather than the CodeMirror editor component. I don't know why and obviously, this isn't true for everybody, but i'm always at war with CodeMirror. It auto-outdents and…
>Also, I wish people would stop conflating "religious" functional programming with pragmatically expressing algorithms as compositions of functions. Yes, me too. And that type of functional programming is very popular…
>But when people wanted to think clearly, they invented math, No, they didn't. They invented a syntax two milleniums ago, optimized for use-cases of those ages, using alphabets of those times. Thinking in greek symbols…
>I would argue that the "anything goes" dynamic procedural languages ( like Ruby, Python ) are far more anti-human, Is it anti-human to be able to interact with the code, and explore what it actually does? A run-time…
Wow, plunker seems really nice. You really do make a strong case with the package catalogue. Some questions though: Would you consider adding automatic server-side proccessing in the future based on file-extension? For…
I'm actually hoping for a transition to a situation where your favorite web framework, will come with its own web-based IDE. Esspecially at the web-development side of things, IDE integration isn't optimal. It's not so…
Well, most of those use the ACE editor component, rather than the CodeMirror editor component. I don't know why and obviously, this isn't true for everybody, but i'm always at war with CodeMirror. It auto-outdents and…
>Also, I wish people would stop conflating "religious" functional programming with pragmatically expressing algorithms as compositions of functions. Yes, me too. And that type of functional programming is very popular…
>But when people wanted to think clearly, they invented math, No, they didn't. They invented a syntax two milleniums ago, optimized for use-cases of those ages, using alphabets of those times. Thinking in greek symbols…
>I would argue that the "anything goes" dynamic procedural languages ( like Ruby, Python ) are far more anti-human, Is it anti-human to be able to interact with the code, and explore what it actually does? A run-time…