6 ms·

I like plain Javascript more. I guess those who are from Java/C# background would like TS.

knowThySelfx 8y ago
Part of the reason is setting up the environment to run all these and the compilation overhead to see the result in browser. I would also like WebAssembly to really take off.
peteretep 8y ago
> I guess those who are from Java/C# background would like TS Been using dynamic languages almost entirely for the last 20 years. I love TypeScript. Starting to wish the other languages I worked with had optional types.
- scrollaway 8y ago
  Good optional types that is. Python, my love of the last 15 years, is finally adopting optional typing but it's an atrociously bad system compared to typescript, to the point that I am seriously wondering if the language will ever have a decent typing system. Having to import basic types, use awkward syntax, etc... Blergh. I really hope we can be more pragmatic and learn from typescript.
  - speedplane 8y ago
    > Python ... I am seriously wondering if the language will ever have a decent typing system. Considering that everyone seems to use six to target both Python 2 and 3, I am seriously wondering if the language will ever advance at all.
    - basil-rash 8y ago
      I don't think we'll get a Python 4 in the foreseeable future ([1] goes into more detail, from a core CPython developer's perspective). But that doesn't mean it can't advance, just that everything will be forwards compatible. Think C and C++, or even ECMAScript, for that matter. [1]: https://opensource.com/life/14/9/why-python-4-wont-be-python-3 https://opensource.com/life/14/9/why-python-4-wont-be-python...
  - patates 8y ago
    Maybe the trick is being pragmatic all the way down and having a TS-like language (with Pythonic syntax) that's compiled to Python.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > Maybe the trick is being pragmatic all the way down and having a TS-like language (with Pythonic syntax) that's compiled to Python. Mypy started out life as a separate language with pythonic but not Python-compatible syntax and multiple backends that was plannining to take advantage of static typing information and avoiding a GIL to be more performant than Python when compiled to native code rather than using the Python backend. It later developed a Python-compatible syntax, before becoming a static typing front-end for Python. Outside of JS land (and that only because of the browser being an environment where the only universally available thing is JS, though WebAssembly maturing may radically change this), there's not really a lot of demand for a separate language that fixes perceived warts in a target language but otherwise hews very close to the target and compiles to that target. Languages that aim to improve another languages ecosystem usually target the same VM instead of being transpiled, and usually offer different style syntax (e.g., Elixir for Erlang.)
knocte 8y ago
I'm from the C# camp. I wouldn't move to TS even if they paid me half a million dollars.
- oaiey 8y ago
  Where can I get this half million dollars?
  - Cthulhu_ 8y ago
    I hear SF companies can pay pretty well.
- kowdermeister 8y ago
  Let me know if you want to pass on a crappy deal like that.
- IronCoderXYZ 8y ago
  This seems more like an emotional, rather than a logical and rational response.
friedman23 8y ago
I'm coming from a python/javascript background and absolutely love TS (and flow).
Cthulhu_ 8y ago
I like both, for their own merits. I personally believe TS is a better choice for larger projects with larger amounts of developers, for 'stricter' projects. ATM I'm doing a pure JS project, it's just some React components / views and some functions that provide glue between 3rd party services. I might do a POC to see how easy it is to use in this project / setting.
jillesvangurp 8y ago
I'm in the middle of upgrading javascript written by somebody who loves it to typescript. I definitely have a preference for strongly typed languages. It's not a crazy amount of work but I seem to be eliminating lots of dodgy code in the process. There are whole categories of bugs that you can completely eliminate by simply annotating your code with some types. IMHO with the current state of technology, opting out of a static type system is getting pretty hard to defend. Why would you open yourself up to all the nasty bugs that can trivially be detected by a type system? How is that acceptable or better? Transpilers, type inference, linters decent editor integration, etc. have removed most of the traditional argumentation against this (e.g. verbosity, expressiveness, etc.).

Part of the reason is setting up the environment to run all these and the compilation overhead to see the result in browser. I would also like WebAssembly to really take off.

peteretep 8y ago

> I guess those who are from Java/C# background would like TS Been using dynamic languages almost entirely for the last 20 years. I love TypeScript. Starting to wish the other languages I worked with had optional types.

scrollaway 8y ago
Good optional types that is. Python, my love of the last 15 years, is finally adopting optional typing but it's an atrociously bad system compared to typescript, to the point that I am seriously wondering if the language will ever have a decent typing system. Having to import basic types, use awkward syntax, etc... Blergh. I really hope we can be more pragmatic and learn from typescript.
- speedplane 8y ago
  > Python ... I am seriously wondering if the language will ever have a decent typing system. Considering that everyone seems to use six to target both Python 2 and 3, I am seriously wondering if the language will ever advance at all.
  - basil-rash 8y ago
    I don't think we'll get a Python 4 in the foreseeable future ([1] goes into more detail, from a core CPython developer's perspective). But that doesn't mean it can't advance, just that everything will be forwards compatible. Think C and C++, or even ECMAScript, for that matter. [1]: https://opensource.com/life/14/9/why-python-4-wont-be-python-3 https://opensource.com/life/14/9/why-python-4-wont-be-python...
- patates 8y ago
  Maybe the trick is being pragmatic all the way down and having a TS-like language (with Pythonic syntax) that's compiled to Python.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Maybe the trick is being pragmatic all the way down and having a TS-like language (with Pythonic syntax) that's compiled to Python. Mypy started out life as a separate language with pythonic but not Python-compatible syntax and multiple backends that was plannining to take advantage of static typing information and avoiding a GIL to be more performant than Python when compiled to native code rather than using the Python backend. It later developed a Python-compatible syntax, before becoming a static typing front-end for Python. Outside of JS land (and that only because of the browser being an environment where the only universally available thing is JS, though WebAssembly maturing may radically change this), there's not really a lot of demand for a separate language that fixes perceived warts in a target language but otherwise hews very close to the target and compiles to that target. Languages that aim to improve another languages ecosystem usually target the same VM instead of being transpiled, and usually offer different style syntax (e.g., Elixir for Erlang.)

knocte 8y ago

I'm from the C# camp. I wouldn't move to TS even if they paid me half a million dollars.

oaiey 8y ago
Where can I get this half million dollars?
- Cthulhu_ 8y ago
  I hear SF companies can pay pretty well.
kowdermeister 8y ago
Let me know if you want to pass on a crappy deal like that.
IronCoderXYZ 8y ago
This seems more like an emotional, rather than a logical and rational response.

friedman23 8y ago

I'm coming from a python/javascript background and absolutely love TS (and flow).

Cthulhu_ 8y ago

I like both, for their own merits. I personally believe TS is a better choice for larger projects with larger amounts of developers, for 'stricter' projects. ATM I'm doing a pure JS project, it's just some React components / views and some functions that provide glue between 3rd party services. I might do a POC to see how easy it is to use in this project / setting.

jillesvangurp 8y ago

I'm in the middle of upgrading javascript written by somebody who loves it to typescript. I definitely have a preference for strongly typed languages. It's not a crazy amount of work but I seem to be eliminating lots of dodgy code in the process. There are whole categories of bugs that you can completely eliminate by simply annotating your code with some types. IMHO with the current state of technology, opting out of a static type system is getting pretty hard to defend. Why would you open yourself up to all the nasty bugs that can trivially be detected by a type system? How is that acceptable or better? Transpilers, type inference, linters decent editor integration, etc. have removed most of the traditional argumentation against this (e.g. verbosity, expressiveness, etc.).