3 ms·
1. That's just so wrong. CoffeeScript came out 9 years ago. The transpiling craze peaked years ago, and most of the good features of all those other languages h
by sbjs 8y ago
1. That's just so wrong. CoffeeScript came out 9 years ago. The transpiling craze peaked years ago, and most of the good features of all those other languages have been pulled into modern ES. There's only a few of them left in somewhat common usage and mostly because they're niche (Haskell-like or Lisp-like). TypeScript solved a totally different problem, it's just a layer of type safety on top of JavaScript, it's actually still JavaScript, so if people like TypeScript then they like JavaScript.
2. That may be true, but that doesn't mean wasm can take over JS in terms of features. For example it still has no GC, which for some things (embedding Doom) may be good, but for general app development it's better to have a GC and the other high-level features JS has that wasm doesn't.
3. That just means some people want wasm to take over, for that one specific reason. It doesn't mean it's actually going to gain traction to evolve in that direction.
- smt88 8y ago> The transpiling craze peaked years ago That's a bizarre comment from someone who just said they're dedicating their career to transpiling. Flow is a layer of safety on top of JavaScript, while TypeScript is a different language. You can't run it with JS runtimes, and it has features JS will never have. It's definitely transpiled. See also: Elm, ClojureScript, NativeScript, PureScript, Haxe, and the staggering number of transpile-X-to-JavaScript projects out there. > but for general app development it's better to have a GC and the other high-level features JS has that wasm doesn't The features that are missing from wasm can be implemented in the original language. Rust, at least, doesn't have garbage collection. There are also multiple proposals to add garbage collection to wasm. > That just means some people want wasm to take over, for that one specific reason. It doesn't mean it's actually going to gain traction to evolve in that direction. People wanting something to happen is all that's needed to make it happen. If you concede people will want it, then you concede it will happen. wasm replacing JS as the API for the browser makes more sense than, say, JavaScript on a server, and yet here we are...
- paavohtl 8y ago> You can't run it with JS runtimes, and it has features JS will never have. It's definitely transpiled. AFAIK TypeScript has a grand total of one non-typesystem related feature which doesn't already exist in JS (or as an ES proposal) - enums[1]. All the other parts of TypeScript can be transpiled just like Flow - by stripping away the type annotations. [1] https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/enums.html https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/enums.html