Hacker News Reader

Comment by tagawa | Hacker News Reader

A bit off-topic and I might have missed something, but why is this on GitHub? I would have thought Wikipedia is best for reference lists like this.

Still an eye-opening read, though.

View on HN

I don't think so:

    [..]
    Family (share genes with CoffeeScript)[citation required]

And now you have to find a tertiary source (not even a secondary, or god forbid first-hand, like for example coffeescript.com) that proves that they share genes.

I'm not trying to be funny or sarcastic, so don't downvote me! That's what Wikipedia is, for better or for worse.

This might work if you create a category and add these languages to it. Ontology-wise you would need one category for the compilers that target javascript (subcat of compilers), and another for languages (primarily?) designed to be compiled as JS (subcat of programming languages). And maybe one more for languages+environments that compile as JS, primarily run in browsers, and wrap some browser APIs in their standard library.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com