When comparing KAJS vs Haste, the Slant community recommends Haste for most people. In the question“What are the best languages that compile to JavaScript? ” Haste is ranked 19th while KAJS is ranked 51st. The most important reason people chose Haste is:
Haste was designed to allow both the client and server to be written as parts of the same, type-safe application. This is in stark contrast to most other options, where the client and server are considered two separate entities, resulting in extra manual validation code and more chances for type errors.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Has Ruby-like @ feature
So for example instead if using this.foo
, you can call that variable by using @foo
.
Pro Implicit bracket and variables
No need for var keyword or brackets, just call a function like foo "bar".
Pro Client and Server as the same application
Haste was designed to allow both the client and server to be written as parts of the same, type-safe application. This is in stark contrast to most other options, where the client and server are considered two separate entities, resulting in extra manual validation code and more chances for type errors.
Pro Almost full power of Haskell
Haste supports the Haskell 2010 standard except for Template Haskell as well as most GHC extensions.
Pro Automatic, type safe program slicing
Haste lets you write client and server as a single program, automatically generating code for the server as well as the client, giving you full type safety even across the Internet.
Pro Generates small, reasonably performant code
Cons
Con No documentation
Con Lacks some minor Haskell functionality
Lacks support for Template Haskell.