5 ms·
As humans it is easy to forget the time savings that we don't see. For a project that uses a lot of Type annotations, it is like getting a bunch of unit tests f
by ozten 4y ago
As humans it is easy to forget the time savings that we don't see. For a project that uses a lot of Type annotations, it is like getting a bunch of unit tests for free or writing a bunch of boilerplate code to validate inputs.
- dalmo3 4y agoYeah it feels like the Seinfeld Effect here. TS is so pervasive now that its vast upsides are just "the new normal", taken for granted.
- roberttod 4y agoI worked for many years without TypeScript, and the development flow was a lot more pleasurable without a big difference in the number of bugs I saw us shipping.
- Gigachad 4y agoI work on a ruby code base that has extremely good test coverage, something around 20,000 unit tests for a relatively simple app, and it’s still almost impossible to update ruby or rails without breaking something. The thing that broke is always impossible to predict from reading the release notes. The most infuriating thing is it’s almost always something a typed language would have picked up like a functions parameters changed or things removed. No amount of unit testing or browser automation is a sufficient replacement to type checking.