You didn’t read the article. It supports CoffeeScript.

Void_ · on Dec 19, 2011

Didn't read the whole thing, nope.

But the title says "CoffeeScript is not worth learning".

frou_dh · on Dec 20, 2011

The correct response at this point is: Oh dear, I will endeavour to read articles in the future :)

icebraining · on Dec 19, 2011

But the title says "CoffeeScript is not worth learning".

No, it says "it's not a language worth learning". The author's point is that CoffeeScript is not a language, but a tool for JavaScript.

Void_ · on Dec 20, 2011

I think it's quite obvious the title is deliberately misleading to get more people to read it.

icebraining · on Dec 20, 2011

Sure, but that doesn't excuse people from commenting without reading it.

evoltix · on Dec 20, 2011

The title is still misleading. It doesn't become clear that the author is advocating CoffeeScript until the end of the article.