wasabi

Because Wasabi doesn't implement syntax trivia, there's no way to losslessly round-trip Wasabi code.

Maybe it's for the best though, the world is probably better off without new wasabi projects.

Throw in that Wasabi necessarily grandfathered ASP globals that C# lacked and you also had fun variable display.

But the whole post makes it clear that working in Wasabi wasn't nearly as difficult as you think.

Only by the end of the third paragraph does it even become apparent that Wasabi is a programming language.

But a single line of Wasabi could map to multiple lines of C#, making the definition of stepping ridiculous.

Writing Wasabi meant that Fogbugz had a more predictable development schedule controlled and instrumented by FogCreek.

Isn't the story of Wasabi that changing OS's and dev platforms is manifestly not a good reason for a rewrite?

And like you said, #4 is what ended up making my Kill Wasabi project feasible.

To address your points: > Fun fact: Wasabi has more unit tests than FogBugz.

People seem to be mistaking the big story about Wasabi today.

The author of this post started at Fog Creek around a year after Wasabi was invented, if I'm getting my timeline right.

The trickiest bit of Wasabi is the type inference, which I admit is not "production-ready" (or "good code") because we basically invented it from scratch.

In github it states "The CLR importer, lexer, parser, interpreter, type checker, language runtime, JavaScript generator, and other components of Wasabi are missing."

"the fact remains that we had a Classic ASP application running on Linux and we didn’t have to pay anybody for the privilege." [0] Commercial reasons dictated why Wasabi was created and retired.

All of Wasabi's unit tests were deleted with Wasabi.

A few of the oldest FogBugz tests are in `unitTest.asp` and were written in Wasabi.

Literally every single person on this thread agrees: if you're going to rewrite code by hand, you wouldn't deploy something like Wasabi.