Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

cycligent.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 133 posts

Re: TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

#41

Post by Klathmon »

pjmlp wrote: post #20
mixedCase wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I got there from thier other article "Does Electron live up to the hype?" tl;dr - It does It creates applications that require at the very least three times as many resources as Qt, which is also a cross-platform tool-kit that allows you a lot of freedom (specially with QML) as well as native OS widgets using a single codebase (although probably compromising on the HIGs' patterns for each OS). I fail to see how Elec…

It is just the second coming of Mozilla XUL, just that this generation hyping Electron was still on their diapers, so they haven't seen it coming and going away without living any trace of it besides Firefox and Thunderbird.

Can we have a rational discussion about web technologies without resorting to insults and ad hominem attacks on an entire "generation"?

Re: TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

#42

Post by Klathmon »

tkubacki wrote: post #39

Since TS is superset of JS it has all it's flaws - we need different lang compiled to JS (like Dart) not a mockup.

Just because a language has a feature does not mean you need to use it.

We use JavaScript, but in 90%+ of our codebase we use it without 'this', without prototypes, without classes, and without other ugly parts.

Re: TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

#43

Post by winter_blue »

chriswwweb wrote: post #35
winter_blue wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I were to start a new project today, I would use Elm[1] for the front-end. It's a very well-designed language (reminiscent of Haskell), specifically designed with HTML and DOM manipulation in mind. [1] http://elm-lang.org/

Is using elm really worth it? I have not yet tried elm, but I wonder if it's advantages really justify the increased costs that this choice might bring? Isn't elm a little bit too young? I mean is the time you and your coworkers will need to learn it, the increased difficulty to hire skilled elm developers, the increased difficulty to find good training courses for new junior developers you hire, the increased diffic…

> the increased difficulty to debug the code compared to js

Elm has an amazing time-traveling debugging system: http://debug.elm-lang.org/ This is a cut above pretty much every other front-end JS framework, and languages that transpile to JS.

> the lack of third party libraries

It has JavaScript interop that's based around message-passing. The JS library is treated sort of like a service, and thus the Elm code is kept isolated from it: https://guide.elm-lang.org/interop/javascript.html

> the increased difficulty to find good training courses for new junior developers you hire

The official docs are pretty good. A good programmer shouldn't have a trouble picking it up. The architectural benefits of using Elm (that lead to a high-quality, almost zero bugs website) is IMO worth it.

Re: TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

#45

Post by skrebbel »

coldtea wrote: post #38
skrebbel wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enterprise-level capabilities . I know the E-word is taboo here but aren't you people exaggerating a but on the trolling?

"Enterprise-level capabilities" doesn't mean anything still. Google is bigger than most enterprises, and they don't use any "enterprisey" stuff, not even in their Java.

Oh come on, you're not even trying. He means, the type checking and refactoring capabilities that you want to have in a large team that relatively quickly changes composition. I.e. the kinds of teams you often find in enterprises.

I doubt Google doesn't use any of the type checking and refactoring tools that come with all Java IDEs out there. You think they rename Java methods with command-line search&replace just to stay in touch with their inner startup? Come on. They're an enterprise like any other and they use what the OP calls "enterprise-level type checking and refactoring capabilities".

I agree that it's a stupid name but I think you're misunderstanding on purpose.

Re: TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

#46

Post by retox »

caub wrote: post #44

I love JS/ES2016 how it is, I seriosuly don't see the advantage of typescript except maybe for a gigantic application

Am I missing something? None of the major browsers even support ES2016 yet do they? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript#Implementations

Re: TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

#47

Post by DonHopkins »

pjmlp wrote: post #20
mixedCase wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I got there from thier other article "Does Electron live up to the hype?" tl;dr - It does It creates applications that require at the very least three times as many resources as Qt, which is also a cross-platform tool-kit that allows you a lot of freedom (specially with QML) as well as native OS widgets using a single codebase (although probably compromising on the HIGs' patterns for each OS). I fail to see how Elec…

It is just the second coming of Mozilla XUL, just that this generation hyping Electron was still on their diapers, so they haven't seen it coming and going away without living any trace of it besides Firefox and Thunderbird.

And thank God for the second coming! Jesus, it's about time.

Electron is much better than XUL along many dimensions.

At least it doesn't force you to use XML external entities in DTD files for text localization. [1]

You just call the Electron localization function! ;) [2]

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Tech/XUL/Tu...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_localization_function

Re: TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

#48

Post by exception_e »

retox wrote: post #46
caub wrote: post #44

I love JS/ES2016 how it is, I seriosuly don't see the advantage of typescript except maybe for a gigantic application

Am I missing something? None of the major browsers even support ES2016 yet do they? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript#Implementations

Most people use Babel to write ES2015/ES7 code that turns into ES5 compatible code: http://babeljs.io/

Re: TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

#49

Post by coldtea »

skrebbel wrote: post #45
coldtea wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Enterprise-level capabilities" doesn't mean anything still. Google is bigger than most enterprises, and they don't use any "enterprisey" stuff, not even in their Java.

Oh come on, you're not even trying. He means, the type checking and refactoring capabilities that you want to have in a large team that relatively quickly changes composition. I.e. the kinds of teams you often find in enterprises. I doubt Google doesn't use any of the type checking and refactoring tools that come with all Java IDEs out there. You think they rename Java methods with command-line search&replace just to…

>* Oh come on, you're not even trying. He means, the type checking and refactoring capabilities that you want to have in a large team that relatively quickly changes composition. I.e. the kinds of teams you often find in enterprises.*

I rarely find such large teams in enterprises.

What I usually find is ad-hoc projects, some in VB6, some targeting IE6 in 2016 still, others in J2EE with "enterprise" application servers, etc. Most done by 1 to half a dozen people. And I don't see them "quickly changing composition" -- the same persons work in the same IT deps for decades...

>I doubt Google doesn't use any of the type checking and refactoring tools that come with all Java IDEs out there. You think they rename Java methods with command-line search&replace just to stay in touch with their inner startup?

No, I mean there's nothing enterprisey about refactoring.

Re: TypeScript Seals My Penchant for JavaScript

#50

Post by icebraining »

pjmlp wrote: post #20
mixedCase wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I got there from thier other article "Does Electron live up to the hype?" tl;dr - It does It creates applications that require at the very least three times as many resources as Qt, which is also a cross-platform tool-kit that allows you a lot of freedom (specially with QML) as well as native OS widgets using a single codebase (although probably compromising on the HIGs' patterns for each OS). I fail to see how Elec…

It is just the second coming of Mozilla XUL, just that this generation hyping Electron was still on their diapers, so they haven't seen it coming and going away without living any trace of it besides Firefox and Thunderbird.

As someone who tried out XUL back when they released XULRunner, in 2006, I don't agree at all; XUL was this weird and poorly document XML language which you could only use for desktop apps (since no other browser besides Mozilla's supported it). Also, JS on browsers was much more limited back then, so code reuse between the site and the desktop app was much less useful.

Meanwhile, Electron and their ilk use all the standard web languages, and JS is nowadays used much more (including on servers), so the code reuse is now actually useful.

Post reply on HN