3 ms·
I don't remotely see TypeScript as the end state of statically typed JavaScript. I think it was the first major project to prove how static typing could work an
by eatonphil 6y ago
I don't remotely see TypeScript as the end state of statically typed JavaScript. I think it was the first major project to prove how static typing could work and benefit browser applications. Flow and TypeScript are just the first generation. In the future I expect the type system to be integrated with the runtime. While there are projects that give you this (Elm, Reason, Bridge.net, Fable, etc.), they are nowhere near as universal as TypeScript nor is that really their aim.
- searchableguy 6y agoI am a newbie reason user. I like the language and ocaml ecosystem but it is just a bit of a pain to do anything practical with it. Soon you are writing a lot of js in reason. Compared to typescript, js and reason mixed code stings like a sharp contrast between sun and moon. Until those languages make themselves feel just like js or completely remove excessive js interlop, they won't be as mainstream.
- kqr 6y agoHuh, I don't share your experience at all. I maintain an F#-and-JS application and I'm constantly surprised by how well interpretation works. You literally just import F# code in JavaScript and use it, as well as the other way around. Sure, if you want to make maximal use of the strong typing of F#, you'll have to annotate JS data as it comes in, but that is necessary complexity, not incidental. And if you're happy with having your F# code "dynamically typed", there's zero ceremony around importing JS stuff.