JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript • Hacker News Board

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#141

Post by ascetone » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:06 PM UTC

bd82 wrote: post #137

wereHamster wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With `--target=es6` I'm not sure if the TypeScript compiler does any code transformation other than removing type annotations. So the chance of a 'transpiler error' is basically zero.

There are a few small things that still require conversion. But that is because Typescript also includes capabilities from ES7 (ES2016). For example - currently in Typescript but only planned for ES7: https://github.com/jeffmo/es-class-fields-and-static-propert... or Support ES7: exponentiation operator https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/issues/4812 Typescript seems to be more like ECMAScript.next + types rather…

My favourite thing they brought over from ES7 is async/await support via ES6 generators.

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#142

Post by Hurtak » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:12 PM UTC

radicalbyte wrote: post #130

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #48

Absolutely not. This is the opposite of what you should do in my opinion. If you're writing an API to be consumed in language X then you need to write the API itself in language X. This will help you capture and handle edge cases, language idiosyncrasies and other similar issues the way you want. Using a different language that gets transpiled into a target language also increases your surface area for bugs because n…

Have you used TypeScript? Try it out for a month or two on a real project. It's the best thing that has happened to web development in recent years - it improves Javascript in a completely compatible and future proof way. The most amazing thing is that Microsoft created it. It's the polar opposite of Old Microsoft - standards are being followed (not subverted), it's simple pragmatic and has no lock-in.

Is TypeScript really future proof? I mean unless types, exactly implemented as they are in TypeScript, will become part of the spec, we can't really call it future proof. Also how is it compatible with anything, JavaScript is compatible with TypeScript, since TypeScript is superset of JS, but it is not compatible the other way around.

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#143

Post by meshko » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:13 PM UTC

L All HN posts titles and comments should start with letter L!

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#144

Post by squeaky-clean » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:13 PM UTC

dobs wrote: post #93

lloyd-christmas wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typescript isn't all that differentiable from ES6. While I'm generally on the vanilla train, feeling fairly compelled to use it when messing around with angular2 has made me very much appreciate it. Change your .js filename to .ts and it will still run, which makes the typing just an added bonus.

Which leaves me wondering why I'd use Typescript over sticking with ES6, especially with tools like Babel making many future features available right now and libraries like React actively making use of them.

> especially with tools like Babel making many future features available right now and libraries like React actively making use of them.

You get all of this with Typescript, as well as optional types. If you're writing any Javascript at all, technically you're already writing Typescript.

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#145

Post by im_down_w_otp » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:17 PM UTC

radicalbyte wrote: post #130

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #48

Absolutely not. This is the opposite of what you should do in my opinion. If you're writing an API to be consumed in language X then you need to write the API itself in language X. This will help you capture and handle edge cases, language idiosyncrasies and other similar issues the way you want. Using a different language that gets transpiled into a target language also increases your surface area for bugs because n…

Have you used TypeScript? Try it out for a month or two on a real project. It's the best thing that has happened to web development in recent years - it improves Javascript in a completely compatible and future proof way. The most amazing thing is that Microsoft created it. It's the polar opposite of Old Microsoft - standards are being followed (not subverted), it's simple pragmatic and has no lock-in.

If Elm didn't also exist, I'd almost agree with you.

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#146

Post by MadcapJake » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:17 PM UTC

robert_tweed wrote: post #135

danielmason wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "the client loses most the advantages of your library being in TypeScript in the first place." Your library still exposes a more clearly-defined API by making types explicit. And saying that the downstream consumer doesn't get the benefit of compile-time type checking if they've chosen not to use type checking is...kind of a truism?

The problem is with the author's assertion that all libraries should be using TypeScript and not, say, Flow, or some other alternative that achieves the same goals, perhaps better.

Does Flow offer type definition files?

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#147

Post by trey-jones » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:20 PM UTC

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #48

Absolutely not. This is the opposite of what you should do in my opinion. If you're writing an API to be consumed in language X then you need to write the API itself in language X. This will help you capture and handle edge cases, language idiosyncrasies and other similar issues the way you want. Using a different language that gets transpiled into a target language also increases your surface area for bugs because n…

This was my reaction upon reading the title of the post, having not used TypeScript. Mostly based on my experience and frustration with CoffeScript, mainly frustration at its existence.

But if TypeScript is an abstraction of Javascript that adds type security, then I'm pretty much all for it, even having been burned pretty often by unnecessary abstraction. I would say that the lion's share of my own javascript bugs spring from type uncertainty.

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#148

Post by lcfcjs » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:20 PM UTC

radicalbyte wrote: post #130

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #48

Absolutely not. This is the opposite of what you should do in my opinion. If you're writing an API to be consumed in language X then you need to write the API itself in language X. This will help you capture and handle edge cases, language idiosyncrasies and other similar issues the way you want. Using a different language that gets transpiled into a target language also increases your surface area for bugs because n…

Have you used TypeScript? Try it out for a month or two on a real project. It's the best thing that has happened to web development in recent years - it improves Javascript in a completely compatible and future proof way. The most amazing thing is that Microsoft created it. It's the polar opposite of Old Microsoft - standards are being followed (not subverted), it's simple pragmatic and has no lock-in.

Oh yeah? Just like coffeescript was a couple years ago? Give me a break.

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#149

Post by lcfcjs » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:23 PM UTC

icholy wrote: post #63

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #48

Absolutely not. This is the opposite of what you should do in my opinion. If you're writing an API to be consumed in language X then you need to write the API itself in language X. This will help you capture and handle edge cases, language idiosyncrasies and other similar issues the way you want. Using a different language that gets transpiled into a target language also increases your surface area for bugs because n…

This reads like knee-jerk reaction from someone who's never tried TypeScript.

I've used it, sure if its your thing, go for it. But don't impose it on everyone, deja vu from the CoffeeScript fan boys, where are they all at now?

Re: JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript

#150

Post by snuxoll » Wed, Mar 16, 2016, 3:24 PM UTC

robert_tweed wrote: post #102

maaaats wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does one miss out from Babel, given that TS is a superset of ES6?

It depends. The problem isn't so much what you might miss out on if all you are doing is writing a library, the problem is what limitations it places on consumers of your library. The most obvious Babel plugins are JSX and Flow. If your library is using TypeScript then it cannot go through the same build process* as any downstream project that is using any Babel plugin. That means you need to publish your library as…

TypeScript supports async/await and JSX (if you use the .tsx extension for your files), the compiler team has been extremely diligent and keeping up with new ECMAScript standards.