That's cool.....
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Heinrich Breedt <[email protected]>wrote: > I prefer Web Essentials: > http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/07d54d12-7133-4e15-becb-6f451ea3bea6 > > Has Less, SCSS and Coffeescript support, and now with TypeScript added > (with sourcemaps) > > > On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Michael Ridland <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Yeah I use SCSS would not do web without it(well now anyway).... there's >> a plugin called web workbench that will auto convert to normal css on save. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 2:52 PM, William Luu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> With regards to CSS. I've recently begun looking at a Project called >>> Less CSS - http://lesscss.org with an associated .NET dynamic compiler >>> - http://www.dotlesscss.org >>> >>> Like TypeScript, Less CSS is still CSS but with extra syntactic sugar on >>> top (as well as other features). >>> >>> Has anyone else had experience with Less CSS? >>> >>> >>> On 5 October 2012 14:03, Scott Barnes <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> JavaScript is dead to me.. I bow before the typescript ecma 6 overlords >>>> .. Now to convert CSS to resource dictionaries and I may actually high five >>>> HTML again >>>> >>>> On 05/10/2012, at 9:24 AM, "Michael Ridland" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Recently I spent 9 months full time doing Javascript building a large >>>> application, I was open minded and learnt to like it. But coming back to c# >>>> recently I realised just how many leagues better c# was than javascript(I >>>> don't dare say this at sydjs). >>>> >>>> Typescript bring some really nice things to javascript that c# has but >>>> it's still very much javascript(more than others eg CoffeeeScript). >>>> >>>> I can say TypeScript is amazingly awesome, you get the best of both >>>> worlds. >>>> >>>> Like Coffeescript does, TypeScript will make you a much better >>>> javascript programmer. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 2:14 AM, David Kean <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> While I’m still skeptical, the one advantage over other similar >>>>> projects (such as Dart), is that it interops with existing JavaScript. >>>>> **** >>>>> >>>>> ** ** >>>>> >>>>> I think my favorite quote so far is, “hate JavaScript, then you’ll >>>>> love TypeScript!”**** >>>>> >>>>> ** ** >>>>> >>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto: >>>>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Davy Jones >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 4, 2012 1:41 AM >>>>> *To:* ozDotNet >>>>> *Subject:* Re: Opinions of TypeScript?**** >>>>> >>>>> ** ** >>>>> >>>>> I haven't looked at it and probably won't. As far as I can see, the >>>>> only new thing is static typing? JavaScript already has oo. There are >>>>> enough technologies around js already why confuse matters more?**** >>>>> >>>>> ** ** >>>>> >>>>> Davy**** >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my starfleet datapad.**** >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 4 oct. 2012, at 10:27, Greg Keogh <[email protected]> wrote:**** >>>>> >>>>> Folks, I just heard about >>>>> TypeScript<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TypeScript>. >>>>> It superficially seems like a good idea. Has anyone tried it? I’m >>>>> downloading the VS2012 >>>>> MSI<http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=34790>for it >>>>> to see what it’s like. Let’s face, anything that makes JavaScript >>>>> development easier will be welcome, but will TypeScript help or hinder? -- >>>>> Greg**** >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > Heinrich Breedt > > “Do not wait to strike till the iron is hot; but make it hot by striking.” > - William B. Sprague >
