81–90 of 116 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are building a webapp using TypeScript and Angularjs and we are quite happy. It takes some time to set up everything, we even created our own yeoman generator, but at the end I think it's worth it.
That seems like pretty awesome, are you hiring?
Does anybody know whether Typescript still filters comments?
Does anyone have experience with using TypeScript with existing libraries like Angular.js? I know that there are definition files for it [1] (and many other popular libraries), but unfortunately I haven't had the time to check out their quality. [1] https://github.com/borisyankov/DefinitelyTyped/tree/master/a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rather than slate me, some constructive discussion would be nice. I'll go from my side: 1. Static type compiler verification saves tonnes of problems. Try managing a 2MLOC dynamically typed solution and you'll get what I mean. 2. Static typed languages are way easier to refactor as more metadata is available to the tooling. 3. Static typed code is easier to test. The type contract is available over the boundary betwe…
My worst nightmare would be managing a 2MLOC inherited from a programmer who used void * as a convenience so it's a little surprising to hear this.
I hope that they keep the possibility of running it stand-alone and not force Visual Studio down their users's throats.
Why are you concerned about this? I didn't see anything in the announcement that would suggest it.
I hope to be able to use TypeScript for years to come, it solves the problem of opt-in types in JavaScript.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rather than slate me, some constructive discussion would be nice. I'll go from my side: 1. Static type compiler verification saves tonnes of problems. Try managing a 2MLOC dynamically typed solution and you'll get what I mean. 2. Static typed languages are way easier to refactor as more metadata is available to the tooling. 3. Static typed code is easier to test. The type contract is available over the boundary betwe…
C has very simple types and allows for untyped operations very easily. Say you cast some ptr of type void* to Foo*: at least in Python you would get a dynamic type error if the cast was incorrect; in C you are lucky if your program immediately crashes. C has some static type safety, and virtually no run-time type safety. Java on the other hand, has a lot of static type safety, is completely memory safe (barring bugs…
Java don't forget suffers as do other languages from lots of nasty things related to types including invalid casts, null reference exceptions etc. When these go phut in production, you're usually in the same situation.
Does anybody know whether Typescript still filters comments?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My worst nightmare would be managing a 2MLOC inherited from a programmer who used void * as a convenience so it's a little surprising to hear this.
void* is used rarely in practice, apart from perhaps kernel mode or language VM's. I have a 150kloc program in front of me which doesn't have a single void*.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rather than slate me, some constructive discussion would be nice. I'll go from my side: 1. Static type compiler verification saves tonnes of problems. Try managing a 2MLOC dynamically typed solution and you'll get what I mean. 2. Static typed languages are way easier to refactor as more metadata is available to the tooling. 3. Static typed code is easier to test. The type contract is available over the boundary betwe…
Your heart is in the right place, but you're stuck with a bad example still. C is hardly a good representative for an statically typed language. Read Luca Cardelli's "Typeful Programming"[1] to get an overview of what typed programming is all about, and see for yourself how brain-dead C and C++ are in comparison. After that go to Benjamin Pierce's canon, "Types and Programming Languages". [1] http://www.daimi.au.dk/~…
It introduced stronger array types, eliminated Cs automatic void* -> T* conversion and, most importantly, put higher-order functions and types on the table.
It might be a warty syntactical abomination, but it can still hold its own against some of the languages of type extremism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My worst nightmare would be managing a 2MLOC inherited from a programmer who used void * as a convenience so it's a little surprising to hear this.
void* is used rarely in practice, apart from perhaps kernel mode or language VM's. I have a 150kloc program in front of me which doesn't have a single void*.