> I don't see that as a justification for limiting the expressiveness of a language.
That's a straw man. I never said that the expressiveness of the language should be limited. There are plenty of languages that are just as (more?) expressive than CoffeScript without the syntactical ambiguity.
> If you take that line of reasoning too far you end up with Java.
That's the slippery slope fallacy. I am in no way suggesting that CoffeScript should have completely rigid syntax. Surely there is a happy medium between CofeeScript and Java. There are plenty of languages that live there.
That's a straw man. I never said that the expressiveness of the language should be limited. There are plenty of languages that are just as (more?) expressive than CoffeScript without the syntactical ambiguity.
> If you take that line of reasoning too far you end up with Java.
That's the slippery slope fallacy. I am in no way suggesting that CoffeScript should have completely rigid syntax. Surely there is a happy medium between CofeeScript and Java. There are plenty of languages that live there.