Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 7, 2023. It is now read-only.

Linter-javac adds >150 ms to loadtime #75

Closed
florianb opened this issue Feb 17, 2016 · 7 comments
Closed

Linter-javac adds >150 ms to loadtime #75

florianb opened this issue Feb 17, 2016 · 7 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@florianb
Copy link

That's slow as a 🐌...

@florianb florianb added the bug label Feb 17, 2016
@florianb florianb self-assigned this Feb 17, 2016
@florianb
Copy link
Author

I guess is will refactor the whole thing soon.

@keskiju
Copy link
Contributor

keskiju commented Feb 17, 2016

Yeah, that is slow :) What is the current opinion on Atom community about CoffeeScript vs Babel/ES6? Is Atom community moving towards ES6 or still continuing with CoffeeScript? If you're going to refactor the whole thing anyway, perhaps Babel could be considered? It might help getting more contributions, since many Java coders are very familiar with JavaScript but only few know CoffeeScript.

@florianb
Copy link
Author

😓
I didn't recognize that connection between Java-Devs and JavaScript but i guess you're right. This would definitely raise contribution-potential.

In fact i have no clue where the coffeescript-thing goes, but i think in general ES will be the simplest thing to rely on. I think it's considerable good idea to rely on ES when refactoring.

@steelbrain
Copy link
Contributor

Just a side note that most of the base linter package has been rewritten into ES6+ and everything new going forward will be in ES6+ instead of coffeescript

@florianb
Copy link
Author

@steelbrain - thanks, then it is decided.. 👯

@florianb
Copy link
Author

https://github.com/AtomLinter/linter-javac/blob/master/lib/init.coffee#L20

should be

require('atom-package-deps').install('linter-javac')

@florianb
Copy link
Author

This issue is part of the refactoring: #76

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants