4 ms·

T'was all fine until folks had to come up with useless typescript and modules and webpack churn and Es2015+ bloat. It's not like we didn't warn them to turn Jav

T'was all fine until folks had to come up with useless typescript and modules and webpack churn and Es2015+ bloat. It's not like we didn't warn them to turn JavaScript into Java; for some of us getting away from Java bloat was the entire point of node.js. Well that, and because CommonJS was portable, or used to be at least. If you want a typed language, just use one, rather than foobaring JavaScript or Python into something they just aren't, a fool's errand.

foepys 4y ago
Since JavaScript is the only way to interact with the DOM in a web browser, you literally cannot use anything different than JavaScript, which makes your point to use other languages quite hard to follow.
- Zardoz84 4y ago
  WASM ?
  - Tajnymag 4y ago
    WASM came up way later than TypeScript and Webpack did. Also, no direct DOM access. You still need a Javascript proxy for that.
cercatrova 4y ago
> useless typescript The only reason I started and continue to use JS is because of TypeScript. There is no world in which I'd use pure JS over TS.
- tannhaeuser 4y ago
  Different folks, different strokes I guess: there's no world in which I'd use an MS-proprietary language over a broadly implemented one, let alone a proprietary language changing all the time and that has a Turing-complete type system, so I don't need to complain about bloat and churn, which is the whole point of this thread.
  - cercatrova 4y ago
    It's open source, not proprietary at all. Suit yourself, I don't have time to deal with runtime errors when they could easily be caught at compile time. I don't care which company makes something as long as it's a good technology. This is also why I use Copilot without any of the alarm that some people on HN and elsewhere display about it.
    - cxr 4y ago
      > It's open source, not proprietary at all "Open source" and "proprietary" are not antonyms. Something can be both open source and proprietary, like XUL. TypeScript is one of them. (So are the NodeJS APIs, for that matter.)
kaba0 4y ago
Java’s ecosystem is in eons better shape, its build tools are actually working so I really don’t get your point. If anything, the JS ecosystem could learn quite a few things from Java.

foepys 4y ago

Since JavaScript is the only way to interact with the DOM in a web browser, you literally cannot use anything different than JavaScript, which makes your point to use other languages quite hard to follow.

Zardoz84 4y ago
WASM ?
- Tajnymag 4y ago
  WASM came up way later than TypeScript and Webpack did. Also, no direct DOM access. You still need a Javascript proxy for that.

cercatrova 4y ago

> useless typescript The only reason I started and continue to use JS is because of TypeScript. There is no world in which I'd use pure JS over TS.

tannhaeuser 4y ago
Different folks, different strokes I guess: there's no world in which I'd use an MS-proprietary language over a broadly implemented one, let alone a proprietary language changing all the time and that has a Turing-complete type system, so I don't need to complain about bloat and churn, which is the whole point of this thread.
- cercatrova 4y ago
  It's open source, not proprietary at all. Suit yourself, I don't have time to deal with runtime errors when they could easily be caught at compile time. I don't care which company makes something as long as it's a good technology. This is also why I use Copilot without any of the alarm that some people on HN and elsewhere display about it.
  - cxr 4y ago
    > It's open source, not proprietary at all "Open source" and "proprietary" are not antonyms. Something can be both open source and proprietary, like XUL. TypeScript is one of them. (So are the NodeJS APIs, for that matter.)

kaba0 4y ago

Java’s ecosystem is in eons better shape, its build tools are actually working so I really don’t get your point. If anything, the JS ecosystem could learn quite a few things from Java.