8 ms·
TypeScript included with Visual Studio 2013 Update 2
- stcredzero 13y agoMicrosoft has a potential winning strategy here vs. Dart. They are basically giving JS programmers no more than what they are directly asking for.
- Touche 13y agoI think this is more directed at C# users. The focus of TS is to let tooling (specifically Visual Studio) do the same stuff it does in C#. They tried and failed to make VS good for JS.
- nawitus 13y agoWell, even if it's directed at C# by Microsoft, it's used by a lot of people that are not into Visual Studio or Microsoft. TypeScript is a lot more than "IDE tooling", even though proper intellisense makes it a lot of nicer to develop. It's not like Microsoft somehow failed to make VS good for JS, it's theoretically impossible to make VS do to JS what TS can do for any IDE.
- shaneofalltrad 13y ago"it's used by a lot of people that are not into Visual Studio or Microsoft" Really? Who? I just don't see them or they must be really good at abstracting away this activity.
- brokenparser 13y agoI haven't seen any Papuan, ever. Doesn't mean they don't exist. As a side project, I'm creating a framework to build Gjs applications using TypeScript. The neat thing is that the compiler can easily create a combined JavaScript file, which when appended to a stub JS file results in a single executable for installation. The bad part is that the supplied lib.d.ts contains definitions for objects that don't exist. See https://wiki.gnome.org/JavaScript https://wiki.gnome.org/JavaScript
- jasallen 13y agoI love VS for javascript. With ReSharper installed it is great. I guess maybe I answered my own question by admitting I need a JetBrains tool in there but: What tool is so great for Javascript? I use Sublime a lot as well on my Mac, and I don't like it as well.
- Touche 13y ago> What tool is so great for Javascript? Chrome/Firefox dev tools.
- judah 13y agoAs a regular user of Chrome dev tools, they're nice, but it's no Visual Studio.
- mixonic 13y agojshint is an excellent tool for static analysis.
- colin_jack 13y agoFor me its Sublime and Chrome Dev Tools.
- Goosey 13y agoMy sibling comments (at time of post) point out Chrome/Firefox dev tools and jshint.. Which I also use every day integrated into the same development flow. Perhaps the question is better posed as "What IDE is so great for Javascript?" FWIW I use VS2012 for Javascript development daily. I also add in ReSharper, the wonderful Web Essentials extension (http://vswebessentials.com/ http://vswebessentials.com/) and a few other extensions I adore ('Productivity Power Tools 2012' and 'Highlight all occurrences of a selected word'). I find the result to be exceptionally good.
- sireat 13y agoWebstorm is pretty awesome for Javascript, but then again what else can you expect from JetBrains?
- jbigelow76 13y ago>They tried and failed to make VS good for JS VS 2013 is actually very nice for Javascript development. The only place it really falls down still is management for pure JS projects. SublimeText still beats it there for grouping JS files together just by folder instead of Visual Studio's need for clunky "solution" and "project" files. But Visual Studio's Angular support is awesome.
- pjmlp 13y ago> But Visual Studio's Angular support is awesome. Netbeans as of 7.4 seems also quite nice. Just as extra info. I also like VS.
- shaneofalltrad 13y agoExactly, with 1 or 2% of the market using TS the only reason to not use vanilla JS is because it is to complicated for you and you want to replicate a C# experience. That's a shame because you loose a lot of the advantages of pure JS. And, if you want to use an IDE over say vim or Notepads, then Webstorm is the best.
- kackontent 13y agoMy only gripe - VS is way too expensive, for my pocket at least. And you need VS to program in TS, Intellisense is that good. Sure, you can go with Express edition but then you don't have node.js extension - which kinda make the whole endeavour bit pointless (again, for me at least). Wish they would bring prices to the level of, for example, those of Jetbrains, or made node.js extension working with Express.
- nawitus 13y agoYou don't need VS for TS. Eclipse and WebStorm support it pretty well. I've evaluated Visual Studio, Eclipse and WebStorm, and Eclipse and WebStorm are better for TypeScript development, at least if you're using Node.js.
- kackontent 13y agoI tried WebStorm and found their support for TS severly lacking, IIRC it was limited to automatic compilation and basic syntax detecting. Code understanding/static type analysis was basically non-existent, e.g. it wasn't checking if argument conforms the interface described in the method's definition - you had to compile the script to find that out.
- nawitus 13y agoIt does check if the arguments are correct these days.
- malaporte 13y agoIn my experience, Typescript support in IntelliJ/Webstorm has always been sketchy --- so much that I find it quite unfair that they would mention this as a feature of the paying version. I still use it, but I often get invalid highlighting, etc.. Then I update to the latest EAP because it's supposed to fix this particular issue... and then other appear. Hmm, annoying... I tried the VS version as well, and there the highlighting and refactoring works very well... but the editor is waaaay slower so I always give up. Funny because it works fine when working with other languages such as C#.
- judah 13y agoWhile baking TypeScript into Visual Studio isn't a certainty of its future success (e.g. Silverlight), it is a good indicator of Microsoft's commitment to the language. As a former CoffeeScript user, I love TypeScript: it's a more consistent language driven by a real language designer, Anders Heijlsberg, author of Turbo Pascal, Delphi, C#, and now TypeScript. I am building 2 major projects using it: - RavenDB Management Studio [1] - BitShuva, my Pandora-clone radio startup [2] Both of these projects have benefited from TypeScript. Microsoft has really built something quite nice here: a clean JavaScript with an optional, flexible type system, plus goodies from the future version of JavaScript (lambdas, classes, modules). I believe this simpler approach is superior to Dart's monolithic standard library + optional VM, superior to the Rubyist's take on JavaScript that is CoffeeScript. [1]: https://github.com/JudahGabriel/ravendb/tree/Raven.Studio.Html5/Raven.Studio.Html5 https://github.com/JudahGabriel/ravendb/tree/Raven.Studio.Ht... [2]: http://bitshuva.codeplex.com http://bitshuva.codeplex.com
- k__ 13y agoI like the ideas of Dart much more, but the JavaScript-interop is rather bad in Dart, because of the DartVM focus. TypeScript seems C# flange-mounted on top of JavaScript, but it's probaby the only viable alternative with good js-interop...
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- jmcqk6 13y agoThat's probably because TypeScript has more in common with CoffeeScript than Dart as a language. Dart is a full featured language that can stand on it's own and has it's own runtime. TypeScript is a superscript of javascript. It doesn't have a runtime - it gets transcompiled into javascript. If coffeescript is for writing javascript like you would write python or ruby, then typescript is for writing javascript like you would C#. I've used TypeScript on a large project I'm working on. Sometimes I regret it. I went with typescript mainly because I was not as confident that I could just jump into building a large JS codebase. Now that I've been in that world for a year, many times I'm wishing that I had just gone with JS from the start, or maybe limited my use of TypeScript to just type annotations.
- puppetmaster3 13y agoThe worst part of ts is that it is associated w/ MS and not npm.
- jmcqk6 13y ago>npm install -g typescript There you go. It's published by microsoft that way. The source code is available under the Apache License, and if you want to get the source code: > git clone https://git01.codeplex.com/typescript https://git01.codeplex.com/typescript
- puppetmaster3 13y agoWhy the downvotes?
- shaneofalltrad 13y agoHow do you down vote? Seriously I could have a field day with this thread.
- benawabe896 13y agoI still don't quite understand why anyone would use TS... especially without an IDE.
- petilon 13y agoThe IDE makes TypeScript compelling, but it is useful even without the IDE. You can use the command-line compiler to check your code for errors. This is extremely useful if you have thousands of lines of code and multiple developers working on the project.
- judah 13y agoTooling is a big boon with TypeScript: Go to Definition, Find All References, Refactor->Rename, debug your TypeScript in Visual Studio. You're right that if you don't use the tooling, TypeScript is of lesser value. Using things like classes, lambdas, modules syntax is still there, of course, and is quite a bit nicer than JS equivalents.
- DCoder 13y agoBe careful with that if you use data-binding in your templates, such as Knockout.js . Visual Studio doesn't know the types of your viewmodels, so those templates are not indexed and not subject to refactoring.
- rat87 13y agoIs there no way to specify type of viewmodel somewhere? Ala d:DataContext from resharper?
- davidp 13y agoEnabling rich IDE support is precisely the point of TypeScript and similar enhancements like Python 3 type annotations: Give the computer in front of you enough information to automatically do for you what you would otherwise have to do manually, freeing you up to focus on higher level problems.
- 13y ago
- NicoJuicy 13y agoNow support for Less, Sass in the IDE instead of using Extensions ;)
- jongalloway2 13y agoLESS was added in Visual Studio 2013[1], SASS is in the 2013.2 CTP 2 release[2] [1]http://blogs.msdn.com/b/webdev/archive/2013/11/06/a-high-value-undocumented-less-editor-feature-in-visual-studio.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/webdev/archive/2013/11/06/a-high-val... [2]http://blogs.msdn.com/b/webdev/archive/2014/02/25/announcing-new-web-features-in-visual-studio-2013-update-2-ctp2.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/webdev/archive/2014/02/25/announcing...
- NicoJuicy 13y agoWeird, my latest test with less made me download extensions and all of that... But thx, i'm going to check it out :)
- rikkus 13y agoTypeScript means ReSharper can do a better job than it does with JavaScript. Brilliant!
- CmonDev 13y agoNo mention of XAML/WPF - just some web crap. Do they not care about enterprise now?
- oblio 13y agoWhat I find funny is that this is, ironically, Microsoft's old strategy but with a positive twist. Embrace, extend, extinguish. Microsoft has already embraced Javascript - we could argue that they brought their own demise as the dominating platform when they created XMLHttpRequest. Now they're extending it. Maybe I'm naive but at this point I don't fear Typescript extinguishing Javascript. If they send things to ECMA for standardization, they'll definitely prove a point in this direction.
- AutoCorrect 13y agoECMA Standardization means nothing with Microsoft. They will still continue the Embrace Extend Extinguish path, no matter if there is a standard or not. Just look at OOXML to see where MS does not follow their own 'standard'.
- seanmcdirmid 13y agoEmbrace and extend can exist without extinguish.
- rubiquity 13y agoWhy is everyone so surprised that Microsoft bundled a language that Microsoft built into a piece of software that Microsoft built? This says nothing about TypeScript's future among non-.NET developers.
- Scuds 13y agodon't know about popularity of typescript outside of MS land But: here's the npm https://www.npmjs.org/package/typescript https://www.npmjs.org/package/typescript nothing stopping you from running TS on linux.
- outside1234 13y agoI would say that TypeScript is actually more popular outside of the .NET ecosystem than in it.
- shaneofalltrad 13y agoAnd this is why TypeScript is 1-2% of the market? Check out GitHub and the rest of the community outside of your workplace or whatever place you are seeing this trend, because the numbers are not showing this. Even search terms of google trends http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F02p97%2C%20typescript%2C%20js&cmpt=q http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F02p97%2C%20typ... shows the term JS is more popular than TypeScript. Also look at twitter and what the great developers of JS are doing; not TS. TypeScript has now tied you to an IDE on some OS (Windows) even if developing on a Unix based server. When you can simply edit JS from a half-gig box using vi if you needed, and do some awesome code. I just don't buy the idea no matter how much Microsoft throws at it, same with dart or any company backed layer over JS.
- outside1234 13y agoAll of that is wrong.
- eranation 13y agoAnyone using the Eclipse plugin? https://github.com/palantir/eclipse-typescript https://github.com/palantir/eclipse-typescript
- kilowatt 13y agoHave they been working on compilation speed? About a year ago I was trying some WebGL "bindings" that had definitions for all the constants and functions, and the game I was hacking on would take 20 seconds to compile on a fairly recent Macbook Air.
- jvilk 13y agoIt has improved in recent releases, but I think they are focusing mostly on incremental compilation via the -watch flag. My projects still take 5-7 seconds to build from scratch on my MacBook Air. You probably know this, but just for others' information: Type inference is expensive, as it requires global information about the project. As a result, compiling one TypeScript file in a project results in the compiler recompiling all of the referenced modules and definitions to re-build up that inference information from scratch. Using the -watch flag keeps the compiler alive with that information in-tact in memory, enabling incremental recompilation.
- radicalbyte 13y agoNo, it's still rather slow. We've "fixed" by doing conditional compilation (using an md5 of the files). A full compile of our project takes a few minutes.
- jeastburn 13y agoI prefer to write my JavaScript directly instead of TypeScript, but the built-in LESS support will be great!
- kayoone 13y agoI have the feeling that many people who dislike this have never really worked with a static typing language. I have never really worked with anything except perl, php, javascript myself until a couple of years ago when i got into game programming with Unity3D using C# and Visual Studio. That experience was enlightening, VS (+ReSharper) is like your own personal AI assistant that deeply understands your code and helps you work more efficiently. Today, while working mostly with JS again (node/angular) i sometimes feel frustrated about WebStorms inability to do the right thing because it just can't understand the code in the way it could if JS was static typed. I mean, its still far superior to a pure text editor if you are working with large codebases imo, but i somehow miss the VS experience.
- bsaul 13y agoI would so much like to have something like that for python...
- whydo 13y agoEmbrace, extend, extinguish.
- frik 13y agoWhat's the advantage over JavaScript 6? Typed arrays are already available with JS 5.