> Your comment doesn’t advance the conversation in any way. That's oddly rude. I thought it might be useful to someone (not necessarily you) to bring up the fa

> Your comment doesn’t advance the conversation in any way. That's oddly rude. I thought it might be useful to someone (not necessarily you) to bring up the fact that TypeScript is subject to a very different pressure than most other mainstream languages. That has obviously resulted in a very different type system, e.g., one with much better support for structural typing than most mainstream languages. > It just restates the claim that typescript is worse in some unspecified way. I did not "restate that claim". In fact, I was careful not to claim that TypeScript is "worse" than any other language, because that's a meaningless word without more context. > Can you give any examples of ways in which those constraints have resulted in a worse language? Again, saying that it's "worse" or "better" without context is meaningless.