Coffeescript - Method chaining with function arguments[2] or use functions instead of params

Question

I start to learn CoffeeScript recently, and I faced with a problem as this. I want to write javascript :

TemplateManager.tmpl(this.template, this.modelJSON(), this.templateOptions()).done(
        function(rendered) { // something1
}).fail(function(ex) {
    // something2

});

Which way I can get it? I try rewrite that:

TemplateManager.tmpl @template, @modelJSON(), @templateOptions()
    .done (rendered) ->
       #something1
    .fail (ex) ->
       #something2

and I get:

TemplateManager.tmpl(this.template, this.modelJSON(), this.templateOptions().done(function(rendered) {

  }).fail(function(ex) {

  }));

Answer 1

Add parenthesis for tmpl and done methods

TemplateManager.tmpl( @template, @modelJSON(), @templateOptions() )
   .done( (rendered) -> 
        #something1 
    )
   .fail (ex) ->
        #something2

The solution isn't elegant, and I think others may give a better way in coffeescript

Updated

Base on comment, removing parenthesis for done . I've updated the code and I think this one is elegant

TemplateManager
   .tmpl(@template, @modelJSON(), @templateOptions())
   .done (rendered) -> 
        some
        code
        here 

   .fail (ex) ->
        another
        code
        here

Answer 2

Instead of making a mess of "I'm not using parentheses because they're optional" and tricky impenetrable indentation, just break things into little pieces, give the pieces names, and put them together simply:

done = (rendered) ->
    # something1
fail = (ex) ->
    # something2
TemplateManager.tmpl(@template, @modelJSON(), @templateOptions())
    .done(done)
    .fail(fail)

I have no idea what "something1" and "something2" are so I can't give them decent sensible names, consider done and fail as proof of concept names.

Just because a function can be anonymous doesn't mean is must be anonymous, just because some parentheses are optional doesn't mean that they must be left out.