Why sweet.js Matters
jlongster.com
jlongster.com
I suspect that the biggest contribution sweet.js will make is lowering the barrier enough that more people release things like coffeescript. Curated, documented packages of syntax improvements to javascript. I suspect that will be more common than individuals rolling new syntax for each project.
Let a thousand coffeescripts bloom. :)
Macros will:
* reduce portability
* add an extra layer of complexity to building and debugging (that abyss[1] is going to be even deeper)
* make code less readable
* increase ramp up time for new engineers on a project as they have to learn your flavor of JavaScript
I'm not saying JavaScript doesn't have room for improvement, but sweet.js is the wrong way to do it.
[1] http://masters.gen.nz/Blog/post/WDCNZ-Thoughts-on-Douglas-Cr...
I agree that there are concerns about debug-ability, but as any Lisper will tell you, you just need the tools to support it. That's why macros need to be native. All the debuggers will be aware of them, so it should be a non-issue.
The whole point of macros is to make code more readable, too. I'm not sure how you can argue that its less readable. Most people agree that the tradeoff is readability/debug-ability.