5 ms·
Oh god please I hope they have. In my experience, dynamically typed scripting languages struggle to keep up with the rigorous structure enforced by statically t
by coryfklein 8y ago
Oh god please I hope they have. In my experience, dynamically typed scripting languages struggle to keep up with the rigorous structure enforced by statically typed languages once the project gets large enough.
Yes, in theory you _can_ write big projects well in dynamically typed languages, but in practice you get a mess of undocumented interfaces and unit tests that don't quite catch the plethora of errors not present when a static type system is in place.
I think Typescript is a great middle ground between the loose running JS hipsters and the Haskell loving Hindley-Milner type system CS researchers. You can enforce the type restraints that you want (I personally am strict about explicit "string | null" declarations) but you're still hip enough to draw the JS talent.
- seanmcdirmid 8y agoTypescript doesn’t have much Hindley Milner in it since it has way too much sub typing (even if it’s all structural).
- wtetzner 8y agoToo bad they didn't go with row types instead of structural sub-typing. Though that might not have matched with their goals of being able to type existing JavaScript. Not sure.
- seanmcdirmid 8y agoExactly. Going structural was purely to match JavaScript interop. Heck, even Dart went with nominal sub typing, it isn’t a very common choice fo an non-functional language.