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

TypeScript 5.0

devblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 332 posts

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#201

Post by epolanski »

endisneigh wrote: post #50

I have a strange take - I think Typescript types are better most other languages, including Java, C++ and Go. It's strange since TypeScript is adding types to a weakly typed language. If we could push JavaScript performance to be another order of magnitude faster it wouldn't be necessary to use other languages, imho. Of course, pushing it that far without effectively creating a new one would be difficult, to say the…

Better is hard to qualify but I'll add my 2 cents:

- for functional programmers TS offers lots of flexibility and power many other languages including statically typed and pure don't

- TS functions or methods that throw don't show up in the type system (they do in Java)

I hope TS keeps getting stricter.

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#202

Post by spion »

jdthedisciple wrote: post #99
spion wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think so too, until I tried Rust. By comparison, JavaScript (and by extension, TypeScript) is still lacking fundamental features and the library ecosystem situation is pretty bad. I wish there was a modern language that took all the good non-manual-memory-management things from Rust and added a GC and some immutable data structures. Error handling, enums, macros (with compile_error! / diagnostics API), trai…

Have you tried C#? Sounds like it would fit your needs perfectly, additionally benefitting from a huge ecosystem behind it.

I did, and I should've listed it. Its my third favorite typed language. At the time I was trying it, its type system wasn't as expressive as TS is today (no algebraic data types, no Result error modelling in the type system etc), but LINQ with its clean syntax and ease of use is something I've missed in every language since (scala `for` syntax looks really awkward by comparison).

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#203

Post by epolanski »

spion wrote: post #87
endisneigh wrote: post #50

I have a strange take - I think Typescript types are better most other languages, including Java, C++ and Go. It's strange since TypeScript is adding types to a weakly typed language. If we could push JavaScript performance to be another order of magnitude faster it wouldn't be necessary to use other languages, imho. Of course, pushing it that far without effectively creating a new one would be difficult, to say the…

I used to think so too, until I tried Rust. By comparison, JavaScript (and by extension, TypeScript) is still lacking fundamental features and the library ecosystem situation is pretty bad. I wish there was a modern language that took all the good non-manual-memory-management things from Rust and added a GC and some immutable data structures. Error handling, enums, macros (with compile_error! / diagnostics API), trai…

Well he said better than most, not best of every.

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#204

Post by [deleted] »

explaininjs wrote: post #196
benatkin wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what I was wondering when I saw yours. What I was showing here is that this solution is simpler than yours and just as good. Rather than add a utility function and a faux primitive type, I just do the normal workaround for TypeScript not supporting this, which is to redundantly check that something is both a number and an integer.

The point of having a utility function is that you don't have to do the redundant checks every time you want to make sure it's both a number and an integer. The critical bit is that you need to define a new type for `integer`s distinct from `number`s to allow reusing the code in a way that doesn't break the type system on the negative path, as Ryan and I demonstrated.

[deleted]

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#205

Post by epolanski »

treis wrote: post #187
endisneigh wrote: post #50

I have a strange take - I think Typescript types are better most other languages, including Java, C++ and Go. It's strange since TypeScript is adding types to a weakly typed language. If we could push JavaScript performance to be another order of magnitude faster it wouldn't be necessary to use other languages, imho. Of course, pushing it that far without effectively creating a new one would be difficult, to say the…

The jankiness of JS combined with the correctness of TS really is a powerful combo. Especially stuff like string keys and const arrays as enums make safe and readable code without a lot ceremony. The big problem is the gap between TS and JS. User defined typeguards are a usable work around but it would be nice to be able to use a native isMyType function. Also would be nice to have constraints natively in types. Like…

You can do all you list with effect-ts/schema.

Arguably the highest quality TS lib out there.

https://github.com/Effect-TS/schema

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#206

Post by epolanski »

hackandthink wrote: post #108
endisneigh wrote: post #50

I have a strange take - I think Typescript types are better most other languages, including Java, C++ and Go. It's strange since TypeScript is adding types to a weakly typed language. If we could push JavaScript performance to be another order of magnitude faster it wouldn't be necessary to use other languages, imho. Of course, pushing it that far without effectively creating a new one would be difficult, to say the…

>If we could push JavaScript performance to be another order of magnitude faster And it would speed up the TypeScript Compiler. My bet is: TypeScript typechecker in Rust: https://github.com/dudykr/stc

TS is implementation-defined, it doesn't have a spec like C or Java.

It's simply impossible to keep up with TS for competing compilers.

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#207

Post by benatkin »

explaininjs wrote: post #196
benatkin wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what I was wondering when I saw yours. What I was showing here is that this solution is simpler than yours and just as good. Rather than add a utility function and a faux primitive type, I just do the normal workaround for TypeScript not supporting this, which is to redundantly check that something is both a number and an integer.

The point of having a utility function is that you don't have to do the redundant checks every time you want to make sure it's both a number and an integer. The critical bit is that you need to define a new type for `integer`s distinct from `number`s to allow reusing the code in a way that doesn't break the type system on the negative path, as Ryan and I demonstrated.

It isn't redundant in terms of the amount of code written, to me. The overhead of having the utility function and type is greater IMO.

If it's in terms of performance, that seems like moving the goalposts. I also wonder if it could be optimized away.

Next time I run into it I might use this:

  if (Number.isInteger(s)) {
    const allowed = (s as number).toExponential()
...and keep the isInteger check close enough that it's readable.

...or this:

  if (Number.isInteger(s)) {
    const n = s as number // should be optimized away by the compiler I think

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#208

Post by [deleted] »

spion wrote: post #87
endisneigh wrote: post #50

I have a strange take - I think Typescript types are better most other languages, including Java, C++ and Go. It's strange since TypeScript is adding types to a weakly typed language. If we could push JavaScript performance to be another order of magnitude faster it wouldn't be necessary to use other languages, imho. Of course, pushing it that far without effectively creating a new one would be difficult, to say the…

I used to think so too, until I tried Rust. By comparison, JavaScript (and by extension, TypeScript) is still lacking fundamental features and the library ecosystem situation is pretty bad. I wish there was a modern language that took all the good non-manual-memory-management things from Rust and added a GC and some immutable data structures. Error handling, enums, macros (with compile_error! / diagnostics API), trai…

[deleted]

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#209

Post by modeless »

yencabulator wrote: post #179
modeless wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're breaking backwards compatibility then my number one request is replacing UTF-16 with UTF-8 for strings and nothing else comes close.

You're asking Microsoft to undo a very Microsoft oddity that Microsoft seems to use just about everywhere. Good luck!

Windows finally added a UTF-8 locale. Sanity may yet prevail!

Re: TypeScript 5.0

#210

Post by conaclos »

dimitropoulos wrote: post #23
latchkey wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious what criteria you used to pick Flow vs. Typescript.

for a lot of people it was some combination of: - Flow has more adoption (it did, for a while, in the OSS sphere) - Microsoft is evil (remember, this was before everyone was using VS Code and loving it. (Also, tautologically, TypeScript has been one of the biggest things that changed this public perception for the people I hang around)) - Facebook is awesome (oh, how times have changed...) - Flow has total type sound…

I am still attracted by Flow which seems to have a simpler and stronger type system. However, Flow seems a bit unstable and the lack of support for TypeScript declaration files and widely used TypeScript syntaxes are stopping me from switching to Flow. I opened an issue for bridging the syntax gap between Flow and TypeScript [0]. Flow v0.201.0 renamed `$Partial` to `Partial` making Flow a bit more compatible with TypeScript. I hope it is just the beginning...

[0] https://github.com/facebook/flow/issues/8989

Post reply on HN