Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Amber vs Earl Grey, the Slant community recommends Amber for most people. In the question“What are the best languages that compile to JavaScript? ” Amber is ranked 11th while Earl Grey is ranked 29th. The most important reason people chose Amber is:
Amber includes an integrated development environment with a class browser, workspace, transcript, object inspector and debugger.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Includes an IDE
Amber includes an integrated development environment with a class browser, workspace, transcript, object inspector and debugger.
Pro Smalltalk is a simple, elegant, and powerful language
Pro One-to-one JS equivalent
Amber is written in itself, including the parser and compiler, and compiles into efficient JavaScript, mapping one-to-one with the JS equivalent.
Pro Powerful hygienic macros
Earl Grey's macro system allows for creating powerful control structures that look just like builtin ones. EG also supports macro libraries which allows developers to provide their macros/DSLs for others to use.
Pro Pattern matching
Pattern matching is an incredibly powerful tool that, once you've tried, you cannot live without. This is not your average hacked-together pattern matching but a complete and integral feature to the language.
Pro ECMAScript 6 Asynchrony
Earl Grey provides Promises based on ECMAScript version 6 and as many NPM libraries already implement. Earl Grey also provides a promisify function that converts old-fashioned callback-style asynchrony to promises.
Pro Fully compatible with Node.js ecosystem
Anything available on NPM can be used just as easily with Earl Grey. In fact, everything else can be used too! Earl Grey has interfaces to Browserify, Webpack, and even experimental support for SystemJS. Earl Grey can even be used to generate npm packages that any node-compatible language can use!
Cons
Con Very few learning resources
There are very little learning resources for Amber outside the official documentation. Which may not be enough for beginners, especially people that don't have much experience in programming.
Con Not true static typing
EG gives you the tools to implement your own type-checking inside of argument lists and elsewhere but there's no analysis done at compile-time like other compile-to-js languages.
Con Unfamiliar syntax
While the language shares a lot of DNA with Python, there are still many new (and interesting) features/sugar that may take some time to get used to.
