> TypeScript's types are not amazingly flexible, so it encourages writing less magical code (...) you can "cast" anywhere so it's not really an issue : (<(str

> TypeScript's types are not amazingly flexible, so it encourages writing less magical code (...) you can "cast" anywhere so it's not really an issue : (<(string)=>string>baz['baz'])('foo') Otherwise typescript support union types and such ... Even without .d.ts headers everywhere it is still useful. I prefer it to babel and co as it is easier to track ES6/7 integration. Never used typed clojure though ,but I don't know any example of a language that didn't have types before and retrofitted type safety without any issue and breaking backward compatibility.