> Choosing to write something in JavaScript that is wildly supported on every platform via browsers This statement makes no sense in two ways and shows you're

> Choosing to write something in JavaScript that is wildly supported on every platform via browsers This statement makes no sense in two ways and shows you're not as accustomed to the problems at hand as you'd perhaps like to be. First, eslint is a developer tool and not intended to run in the browser. Second, you generally do not distribute typescript code but compiled js to target platforms. > TypeScript seems to have entered the same hype cycle as Rust (if it didn't do it before Rust) where people seem to think that everything written in X should actually be written in Y instead (C/C++ => Rust and JavaScript/Any compile to JS => TypeScript). Doesn't mean every project have to follow that though. No, TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that can be enabled with little cost for the gigantic benefit of bringing type safety to a language which people have mocked for its unsafety for decades. I really wish people on HN would hold back a little with their contrarian purism at all cost.