Take the 2-minute tour ×  The "Verbally Readable !== Quicker
Comprehension" argument on http://ryanflorence.com/2011/case-
against-coffeescript/ is really potent and interesting. I and
I'm sure others would be very interested in evidence arguing
against this. There's clear evidence for this and I believe it.
People naturally think in images, not words, so we should be
designing languages that aren't similar to human language like
English, French, whatever.  Being "readable" is quicker
comprehension. Most articles on Wikipedia are not readable as
they are long, boring, dry, sluggish and very very wordy.
Because Wikipedia documents a ton of info, it is not especially
helpful when compared to sites with more practical, useful and
relevant info. Languages like Python and CoffeScript are
"verbally readable" in that they are closer to English syntax.
Having programmed firstly and mainly in Python, I'm not so sure
this is really a good thing.  The second interesting argument is
that CoffeeScript is an intermediator,