4 ms·

Crossing my fingers that the proposal for allowing (browser-ignored) type annotations in javascript progresses: https://tc39.es/proposal-type-annotations/ https

Crossing my fingers that the proposal for allowing (browser-ignored) type annotations in javascript progresses: https://tc39.es/proposal-type-annotations/ https://tc39.es/proposal-type-annotations/ Between that, HTTP2/3 and ES modules many of the downsides for building apps with no compile step are almost completely mitigated.

benatkin 3y ago
Wouldn't that conflict with possible future optional static typing? It's only Stage 1. I'm hoping it doesn't make it in its current form. Some good discussion in the issues, though: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations/issues https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations/issues
- Someone1234 3y ago
  Can you explain why the two proposals would "conflict?" Seems like they're proposing the same thing to me.
  - benatkin 3y ago
    It would be hard to separate ignored ones from ones that would use a possible future optional static typing system. They would possibly have to use a different, uglier syntax.
    - Someone1234 3y ago
      I'm not sure I follow. Both proposals are suggesting that browser's engines ignore the syntax completely to allow some other, external, process to check them. They use slightly different wording but are describing the same basic idea: This syntax will be ignored entirely and then optional/other process can use this area for whatever.
      - benatkin 3y ago
        There are other languages that have optional static typing that don't treat types as comments. JavaScript could evolve to add support for this.
nwienert 3y ago
Does http2 solve waterfall imports? Also wouldn't tree shaking still be unsolved? What about minification? IMO build step woes are really overstated, my build step has linting, type checking, optimization, bundle analysis size diff checks, enables JSX, and is basically necessary for development anyway as you get hot reloading, compiler-added features for better debugging, etc.
- ryncewynd 3y ago
  Care to share your build set up? I'd very much appreciate it I haven't done js since jquery days, but keen to get into modern js development
  - nwienert 3y ago
    I maintain Tamagui, so the tamagui starter kit basically is it, try `npm create tamagui`
- mixedCase 3y ago
  >Does http2 solve waterfall imports? It used to, but browsers ruined it because they didn't want to help improve caching support
- semiquaver 3y ago
  Waterfall imports are solved by rel=modulepreload.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- tomjen3 3y ago
  HTTP2 allows the server to push files to the browser. If you don't have tons of code, tree shaking and minification is not that important. If you depend on a couple libraries (Jquery, for example) those can be minified and just refered to directly in the source.
  - spiffytech 3y ago

benatkin 3y ago

Wouldn't that conflict with possible future optional static typing? It's only Stage 1. I'm hoping it doesn't make it in its current form. Some good discussion in the issues, though: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations/issues https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations/issues

Someone1234 3y ago
Can you explain why the two proposals would "conflict?" Seems like they're proposing the same thing to me.
- benatkin 3y ago
  It would be hard to separate ignored ones from ones that would use a possible future optional static typing system. They would possibly have to use a different, uglier syntax.
  - Someone1234 3y ago
    I'm not sure I follow. Both proposals are suggesting that browser's engines ignore the syntax completely to allow some other, external, process to check them. They use slightly different wording but are describing the same basic idea: This syntax will be ignored entirely and then optional/other process can use this area for whatever.
    - benatkin 3y ago
      There are other languages that have optional static typing that don't treat types as comments. JavaScript could evolve to add support for this.

nwienert 3y ago

Does http2 solve waterfall imports? Also wouldn't tree shaking still be unsolved? What about minification? IMO build step woes are really overstated, my build step has linting, type checking, optimization, bundle analysis size diff checks, enables JSX, and is basically necessary for development anyway as you get hot reloading, compiler-added features for better debugging, etc.

ryncewynd 3y ago
Care to share your build set up? I'd very much appreciate it I haven't done js since jquery days, but keen to get into modern js development
- nwienert 3y ago
  I maintain Tamagui, so the tamagui starter kit basically is it, try `npm create tamagui`
mixedCase 3y ago
>Does http2 solve waterfall imports? It used to, but browsers ruined it because they didn't want to help improve caching support
semiquaver 3y ago
Waterfall imports are solved by rel=modulepreload.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
tomjen3 3y ago
HTTP2 allows the server to push files to the browser. If you don't have tons of code, tree shaking and minification is not that important. If you depend on a couple libraries (Jquery, for example) those can be minified and just refered to directly in the source.
- spiffytech 3y ago