Flow vs. Typescript

Post by joshuacc » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 1:47 PM UTC

dtech wrote: post #28

Sacho wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This means I can just write JavaScript and add comments for types. No transplier step, no messing around in a different but similar language, no additional complexity, just easy. Can't you do the same thing with TypeScript's typings?

No. With flow you can do both: var x /*: string*/ = "" var x : string = "" With TS you can only do the latter. The first one has the advantage that it's legal Javascript, thus not requiring a compiler. Since typescript is set-up purely as a compiler anyway I'm not sure it would be a useful feature for them. A disadvantage could be that it's easier to make silent errors by making syntax errors in the comments. I don't…

    /**
     * @param {string} a
     * @param {number} b
     * @returns {string}
     */
    function foo(a, b){
      return a + b;
    }

    function foo(a: string, b: number): string {
      return a + b;
    }

Post by smt88 » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 2:04 PM UTC

shados wrote: post #94

smt88 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no messing around in a different but similar language TypeScript would be a disaster if it subtly changed the semantics of JavaScript. It doesn't, though. It's a superset, so it's really not a "different but similar" language. It's the same language with more features, and the compiler is a great guide to using those features.

You mean like how it breaks ES6 classes semantics by making members enumberables? Whoops (I know, if you look at my comment history I used that example all the time...but it's just such an easy one). When comes the time to pick between shinier output and correctness, TypeScript is perfectly happy to diverge from JavaScript, until it really has no choice (eg: when it moved to ES6 modules)

Post by whatever_dude » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 2:33 PM UTC

Hurtak wrote: post #30

greenspot wrote: post #29

I like very much the last slide and the author's recommendation. Helpful and better than the admonitory 'yes you should use typed JS': - if your project does not live for long: no - if your project is really simple: no - if there is a chance you will need to refactor the thing: yes - if your system is very important or even crucial for the success of your company: yes - if people enter or leave your team frequently:…

> - if people enter or leave your team frequently: yes Interesting, I would put that one as a no, since introducing TS to you project means longer time train new employees. On the other hand it will make sure their commits break something less often, so not so sure about this one

Post by 16bytes » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 2:36 PM UTC

greenspot wrote: post #42

Skinney wrote: post #14

The main problem for me, is that Flow doesn't support Windows (yet?). I've been working solo on a frontend a couple of months now, and the team has just been extended with a new developer (yay). However, he uses Windows, and so all my type annotations are worthless. We're making the switch to TypeScript once 2.0 is released (easier to port with strictNullChecks).

Really wondering: who is developing Node/JS on Windows nowadays? Not that I don't like Windows (I like W10 + the new Ubuntu within efforts a lot), but the ecosystem around Node is so much tailored around Linux. Even with OSX where we have an excellent support, there's still some slight friction when deploying to Ubuntu. Or is Windows 10 a viable alternative for Node devs?

Post by whatever_dude » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 2:40 PM UTC

chvid wrote: post #41

I am the only one who is happy to code without static typing? Enjoying fast compilation, small, fast editors, flexibility. I don't really make stuff like marry(a, b) and then call it with a banana and an apple by accident. Sure I make plenty of mistakes when I am coding but only very few could have been caught by a static type check. Take one of the examples in the slides: let obj: string; obj = 'yo'; // Error: Type…