51–60 of 247 posts
Please don't bury this comment completely. I am going to be honest and tell you that I believe TypeScript is pure embrace, extend, extinguish from Microsoft. And I am amazed honestly that so many web developers are eating it up.
Please don't bury this comment completely. I am going to be honest and tell you that I believe TypeScript is pure embrace, extend, extinguish from Microsoft. And I am amazed honestly that so many web developers are eating it up.
Please don't bury this comment completely. I am going to be honest and tell you that I believe TypeScript is pure embrace, extend, extinguish from Microsoft. And I am amazed honestly that so many web developers are eating it up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is another reason: > If you work outside the San Francisco bubble and are stuck on Windows, Flow isn't really an option at the moment.
It is not the case anymore. Flow now supports windows out of the box.
> A big factor in my company recently switching to TypeScript was Windows performance, even with the recent massive advancements for Flow on Windows it's still painful to use and the tooling is miles behind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WASM doesn't have DOM access or GC. It's not the answer.
Is that correct? WASM has no DOM access? (I'm asking, not advocating anything.) How does code that runs in a browser do UI I/O without DOM access? Is the intent that you go on writing all of your I/O and DOM-manipulating code with JavaScript and call WASM-implemented helper functions from JS code?
Speaking as the person who implemented JSX support for TypeScript, I question the premise! JSX support (and implementation of React semantics for typechecking that JSX) was a very popular feature request. I can tell you just from how quickly people notice when something JSX-related changes in the nightly build that there are a lot of people using TypeScript with React. Also, since this seem to be a popular misconcept…
Practially not, but it's a bit of a hassle. either you leave the JSX be and parse it with Babel or you need some wrappers for you VDOM lib, because tsc assumes a namespace, while most not-React-vdom libs just deliver a function out of the box.
I was always wondering why HN crowd is ok with TS and so prejudiced against Dart - Dart has NG2, await async in older browsers and good tooling (webstorm, vscode) and much saner package system. When doing lot of small web apps - it's easier to mantain.
I was always wondering why HN crowd is ok with TS and so prejudiced against Dart - Dart has NG2, await async in older browsers and good tooling (webstorm, vscode) and much saner package system. When doing lot of small web apps - it's easier to mantain.
At least in my view, there's a couple of big things: Dart doesn't introduce that many advantages over JS for all of its differences, and TS introduces many of them with a smaller diff; there's also the presentation of it—Dart was originally presented as a wholesale replacement of Dart, to ship in all browsers, the language more or less as a fait accompli, which rubs plenty of people the wrong way.
As someone with experience in both languages, I could not disagree more.
> Dart was originally presented as a wholesale replacement of Dart
I think you meant replacement of JS here. I guess it depends entirely on what you think of JS as a language. I, for one, would rather a language that fixes core issues with JS, instead of just being a superset of JS.
I was always wondering why HN crowd is ok with TS and so prejudiced against Dart - Dart has NG2, await async in older browsers and good tooling (webstorm, vscode) and much saner package system. When doing lot of small web apps - it's easier to mantain.
It puzzles me also. Dart is solid language with great libraries, good tooling and still it is ignored by most developers. The truth is people from JS world seems to like 'cool' languages, but the one who want to be productive just uses boring Java/Dart etc.