3 ms·
JS is a great language for it's intended purposes but I still can't get onboard the TS train. Adding types post-hoc has never improved a codebase that I've seen
by vorpalhex 6y ago
JS is a great language for it's intended purposes but I still can't get onboard the TS train. Adding types post-hoc has never improved a codebase that I've seen but it has caused a lot more bad patterns to show up.
Simplicity is a virtue (at least sometimes).
- jolux 6y ago> Adding types post-hoc has never improved a codebase that I've seen but it has caused a lot more bad patterns to show up. I mostly meant that I do all my greenfield JS dev using TypeScript. Out of curiosity, what bad patterns have you seen caused by adding types “post-hoc”?
- rumanator 6y ago> JS is a great language for it's intended purposes Which part of JS, as a programming language, do you see as great or even adequate when compared with contemporary programming languages? > Adding types post-hoc has never improved a codebase that I've seen but it has caused a lot more bad patterns to show up. That assertion makes no sense. I mean, all TypeScript does is impose arbitrary sanity checks on a programming language which is plagued for not having any. Where do you interpret the addition of sanity checks as a source of problems?