As far as I can tell, the differences between Jsex/Wind and Streamline (and for that matter IcedCoffeeScript and TameJS) are largely superficial. The tough part is the compiler, which you can only do so many ways; all other features are just bells and whistles which could be implemented by a user of any library. I prefer Streamline since it seems like Bruno has done a really good job under the hood and it seems cleaner overall. Though personally I just use Futures from node-fibers directly (I mean I'm the author after all).
On Saturday, August 18, 2012, Axel Kittenberger wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Bruno Jouhier > <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');> > > wrote: > >> Regarding your point 1), there is no difference in the browser: >> streamline provides a transform API which is just equivalent to the >> Wind.compile API. I don't understand your point. >> > > I consider more diversity generally a good sign. For example regarding one > of my free software projects to my knowledge there is no other alive free > software project out there that uses a similar approach - to my dismay. One > or the other time something did blink up and when I noted it I took the > chance to analyze their code, and get new inspiration and ideas. > > So wind got a eval() inside the code. Its not that a big thing to me, > certainly achievable with streamline as well, since its javascript > itself. Maybe in streamline we're missing a predefined or requireable > _eval() call to streamline generate/eval streamlined code on the fly? I > haven't yet felt the need for it, but it sounds like a completion to the > API. > > Input source as comments - as far it isn't there it might be a useful idea > to some? I use streamline always as -lp to preserve lines, so for the > generated code you get a 1:1 relation to the source code. > > Wrapping everything in effectively an eval() call has possibly its > merrits, since you can call node directly (with parameters to it, its > possible with streamline but needs a little more complicated call to node). > Or code that is not streamlined/(un)winded is not touched at all. > > I wonder which tool produces the better stack traces? I consider the eval > call might be a drawback to that. Other than that still looking for a good > comperison that actually doesn't do the usual thing about streamline > telling stuff about it, thats just not true. > > -- > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > Posting guidelines: > https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "nodejs" group. > To post to this group, send email to > [email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', > 'nodejs%[email protected]');> > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en > -- Sent from My iPhone -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
