I'm afraid the current webpage is a DYI project. Having been a freelance technical / scientific application programmer for most of my life, web design is just something I do if really needed. In the long run probably the site should be made by "real" web designer.
Meanwhile can you indicate what's most disturbing about it? I guess the mobile experience is the most problematic? Or just the layout? Fonts? Accessability? We should probably have a professionally designed logo as well. But currently we're focused on making the compiler better. 3.6 -> 3.7 was really a big step, due to the modules.
There will also be a special website to play with Transcrypt. The URL was already reserved: tsfiddle.org. But it will be a while until somebody finds the time to turn it into a playground / educational site. Everyone working on Transcrypt has a daytime job as well, that's how it is with open source, although the past months I think most of my time was spent on Transcrypt.
The project was born from practical needs for a medical imaging project. In my experience the switch to Python is a great improvement in productivity and clearness. And it's more fun, above all...
Starting with Transcrypt v3.6.101 it is now possible to create native JavaScript component frameworks using the Transcrypt Python to JavaScript compiler. This makes it possible to write compact, fast JavaScript components for the browser in Python.
Components can be freely mixed on a page without requiring recompilation. A developer doesn't need Transcrypt or any knowledge of it to use such a framework.
Each page has one unit that contains the Transcrypt runtime and, if needed, any central facilities. It is compiled with the -u .run switch. In addition each page can hold as many separate components as needed. Compile these with the -u .com switch.
A loader is generated, accepting a list of components. By varying this list, each page can have its own subset of components, without the need to recompile. The generated JavaScript code for components can be very small, typically a few hundred bytes. The runtime and central facilities are included in the page only once.
Do you want them to be able to start programming like "childsplay", but maybe use it professionally later on?
In that case Python is a good choice. It's the #1 language in education world wide. I used it to teach programming to my son. It is free, low threshold, and I've earned a living with it for many years.
Some experimentation can be done on-line without installing anything.
But of course in remote places there may be no fast internet connection.
When I teach programming to a group, installation of software always costs lots of time. So it's important to preinstall what the children need, in a more or less protected way, e.g. administrator privilege. Otherwise they'll probably cripple their system accidentally in no time.
After extensive testing under Windows and Linux, Transcrypt is considered ready for production now. The set of supported language features, which already included multiple inheritance, is expanded to include operator overloading as used e.g. in matrix algebra, set comprehensions, lambda's and many other things. Optimizations include call memoizing, compiling e.g. i += 1 to i++ and simplifying for-loops over a closed range of integers to be just as brief and efficient as the matching JS loop. Pip install of Transcrypt and packages for it is now supported. Docs are at http://www.transcrypt.org. Examples have been added for a.o. node.js, D3.js and jQuery. If you like Python for writing readable, maintainable code, no need to develop browser apps in JS anymore. Bugs and feature requests can be submitted at: https://github.com/JdeH/Transcrypt
No. As soon as JS supports this, I'll work on that. If you work in an environment with multitasking primitives, you can use it via the appropriate JS API, though. In other words, anything you can do in JS, you can do in Transcrypt. But a standard Pythonic API to multitasking is on my wish list.
You're encouraged to follow PEP8 completely for your Transcrypt apps and libs. As for interop with JS libs, following JS conventions is probably best, although some often use libs may acquire a PEP8 facade.
Well, in fact, the only thing it had to be right now, is functional, which indeed I believe it is. There's no css, just hand coded html. And it was ready in a snap. But if I ever change it it will remain functional in the first place. It won't feature any floating menu buttons that try to escape your mouse button, or screenwide pictures of managerial looking types at a conference desk. Frames seem to be a bit difficult for search engines. But for now they'll have to do.
I don't mind supporting, maintaining and documenting it. I've taken a good look at Brython and it just isn't what I can use for my projects. Also the fact that there are cows and horses I don't consider a waste of Nature's effort. Building big banking offices is, in my view. But making something is just fun. The whole life is a waste of effort, afterall what's the purpose, unless you enjoy it... ;)
Commitment will require continuity, so in the long run I want it to be independent of me, except for technical input. I plan transfer it to a foundation in a few years. At the same time I'd like to keep a firm hand on the wheel to keep it lean and focused.
As for the 'hack' part: I am rather old... And I remember very lively people thought Kernighan and Ritchie C was a hack to avoid programming directly for a processor using a macro assembler.