Talk:CoffeeScript: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Cybercobra (talk | contribs) section |
→WTF: new section |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
* Good point, but moot now that the official announcement has been made. Proper citation (a tweet by a Rails Core Team member, linking to a commit in the official Rails repository) included. --[[User:Trevor Burnham|Trevor Burnham]] ([[User talk:Trevor Burnham|talk]]) 15:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC) |
* Good point, but moot now that the official announcement has been made. Proper citation (a tweet by a Rails Core Team member, linking to a commit in the official Rails repository) included. --[[User:Trevor Burnham|Trevor Burnham]] ([[User talk:Trevor Burnham|talk]]) 15:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
== WTF == |
|||
This isn't an encyclopaedia article, it's 80% fanboy astroturfing and 20% casual references to things like git, which doesn't help general readability. |
|||
Come on, clean this trash up. |
|||
Revision as of 01:35, 29 May 2012
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 7 March 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
Rails
There have been reports that official support for CoffeeScript will be included in the next point release of Ruby on Rails.[4]
'next' as in which version? Most of this article is not time-independent. as in, next year it will be wrong, and a year ago it was wrong. Say 'as of June 2010...' or something like that to qualify now-dependent statements. Think of someone reading this 5 or 10 years from now - your words will still be here.
OsamaBinLogin (talk) 17:26, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- Good point, but moot now that the official announcement has been made. Proper citation (a tweet by a Rails Core Team member, linking to a commit in the official Rails repository) included. --Trevor Burnham (talk) 15:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
WTF
This isn't an encyclopaedia article, it's 80% fanboy astroturfing and 20% casual references to things like git, which doesn't help general readability.
Come on, clean this trash up.