Personally, I find this quite readable. And honestly, my comment was more about comparing CoffeeScript to its compiled JavaScript output, as is done in the slides. The compiled output is incredibly verbose and gives the false impression that JavaScript is always complicated.
Comments
You could also do it with chain, which could make the first example a bit simpler to read and write. It is something like:
I often use CoffeeScript + UnderscoreYou don't even need to call _.chain or value – underscore already does this automatically. You can also write it like so, if you like:
Personally, I find this quite readable. And honestly, my comment was more about comparing CoffeeScript to its compiled JavaScript output, as is done in the slides. The compiled output is incredibly verbose and gives the false impression that JavaScript is always complicated.