So there is lexical scope, but it requires "do" which means an extra function, s... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		benth on Sept 17, 2012 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: Actually, you don't understand lexical scope So there is lexical scope, but it requires "do" which means an extra function, something that wasn't required in JS. You don't get lexical scope "for free" in CoffeeScript, there's overhead, unlike in JS. Is that right?

raganwald on Sept 18, 2012 | [–]

Yes, and that is a concern I share:

https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/issues/2552

Scheme interpreters have been optimizing away the cost for most cases since the 1970s.

mchahn on Sept 22, 2012 | [–]

I use `var x;` which transpiles exactly to var x; so there is no overhead. The backtick in CS lets JS pass through.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact