5 ms·

What happens to TypeScript when ECMAScript brings it's core elements to the language?

by harel 4y ago

WorldMaker 4y ago
Typescript for a while has focused on Stage 3 and Stage 4 proposals, so its "core elements" are almost all already in the language. Unless you mean the type annotations itself? The good news there is that there is a Stage 1 proposal to take the Python/Ruby approach of bringing them into the language: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations Were that to happen, that proposal doesn't apply any type checking semantics for the browsers themselves and you would still want a type checker, such as Typescript, to actually check the types that are annotated. (Just as you want to run Mypy or Sorbet, respectively, in the cases of Python/Ruby.)
- harel 4y ago
  Yes I meant type annotations. To be honest, given a choice, I opt for JavaScript. I personally don't find the benefit of TS is worth than all the extra work it requires, to make what is a dynamic language, not so dynamic. Why go for Python/JavaScript/Ruby if the first thing one does is to eliminate what makes it Python/JavaScript/Ruby? (Well, in the case of JavaScript, granted there's little choice available).
  - WorldMaker 4y ago
    I think tools like Typescript/Mypy/Sorbet exhibit is that there's a lovely "gradually typed" spectrum between "no type information/purely dynamic typed language" and static typing. "Gradual typing" has a lot of best of both worlds to it: write the raw and fast "no types" notebook code to proof of concept, then gradually add types as you test and productionize the same code. Production code can have lots of additional type checking and type testing that adds to robustness, while development and early code still have the benefits of a type system that can move fast and easily break things. It's nice to be able to move across that spectrum as a project matures. It's no longer a "hard binary" between dynamic typed languages and static typed languages, and you can choose much more interesting positions between 0% static types and 100% static types depending on your risk profile and interest.
    - harel 4y ago
      That's a sensible way to look at it.

What happens to TypeScript when ECMAScript brings it's core elements to the language?

by harel 4y ago

What happens to TypeScript when ECMAScript brings it's core elements to the language?

Typescript for a while has focused on Stage 3 and Stage 4 proposals, so its "core elements" are almost all already in the language. Unless you mean the type annotations itself? The good news there is that there is a Stage 1 proposal to take the Python/Ruby approach of bringing them into the language: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations Were that to happen, that proposal doesn't apply any type checking semantics for the browsers themselves and you would still want a type checker, such as Typescript, to actually check the types that are annotated. (Just as you want to run Mypy or Sorbet, respectively, in the cases of Python/Ruby.)

harel 4y ago
Yes I meant type annotations. To be honest, given a choice, I opt for JavaScript. I personally don't find the benefit of TS is worth than all the extra work it requires, to make what is a dynamic language, not so dynamic. Why go for Python/JavaScript/Ruby if the first thing one does is to eliminate what makes it Python/JavaScript/Ruby? (Well, in the case of JavaScript, granted there's little choice available).
- WorldMaker 4y ago
  I think tools like Typescript/Mypy/Sorbet exhibit is that there's a lovely "gradually typed" spectrum between "no type information/purely dynamic typed language" and static typing. "Gradual typing" has a lot of best of both worlds to it: write the raw and fast "no types" notebook code to proof of concept, then gradually add types as you test and productionize the same code. Production code can have lots of additional type checking and type testing that adds to robustness, while development and early code still have the benefits of a type system that can move fast and easily break things. It's nice to be able to move across that spectrum as a project matures. It's no longer a "hard binary" between dynamic typed languages and static typed languages, and you can choose much more interesting positions between 0% static types and 100% static types depending on your risk profile and interest.
  - harel 4y ago
    That's a sensible way to look at it.