31–40 of 111 posts
The worst part of ts is that it is associated w/ MS and not npm.
There you go. It's published by microsoft that way.
The source code is available under the Apache License, and if you want to get the source code:
> git clone https://git01.codeplex.com/typescript
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is more directed at C# users. The focus of TS is to let tooling (specifically Visual Studio) do the same stuff it does in C#. They tried and failed to make VS good for JS.
I love VS for javascript. With ReSharper installed it is great. I guess maybe I answered my own question by admitting I need a JetBrains tool in there but: What tool is so great for Javascript? I use Sublime a lot as well on my Mac, and I don't like it as well.
Microsoft has a potential winning strategy here vs. Dart. They are basically giving JS programmers no more than what they are directly asking for.
My only gripe - VS is way too expensive, for my pocket at least. And you need VS to program in TS, Intellisense is that good. Sure, you can go with Express edition but then you don't have node.js extension - which kinda make the whole endeavour bit pointless (again, for me at least). Wish they would bring prices to the level of, for example, those of Jetbrains, or made node.js extension working with Express.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like the ideas of Dart much more, but the JavaScript-interop is rather bad in Dart, because of the DartVM focus. TypeScript seems C# flange-mounted on top of JavaScript, but it's probaby the only viable alternative with good js-interop...
That's probably because TypeScript has more in common with CoffeeScript than Dart as a language. Dart is a full featured language that can stand on it's own and has it's own runtime. TypeScript is a superscript of javascript. It doesn't have a runtime - it gets transcompiled into javascript. If coffeescript is for writing javascript like you would write python or ruby, then typescript is for writing javascript like y…
I have however been annoyed at not being able to use sweet.js macros.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is more directed at C# users. The focus of TS is to let tooling (specifically Visual Studio) do the same stuff it does in C#. They tried and failed to make VS good for JS.
I love VS for javascript. With ReSharper installed it is great. I guess maybe I answered my own question by admitting I need a JetBrains tool in there but: What tool is so great for Javascript? I use Sublime a lot as well on my Mac, and I don't like it as well.
FWIW I use VS2012 for Javascript development daily. I also add in ReSharper, the wonderful Web Essentials extension (http://vswebessentials.com/) and a few other extensions I adore ('Productivity Power Tools 2012' and 'Highlight all occurrences of a selected word'). I find the result to be exceptionally good.
Maybe I'm naive but at this point I don't fear Typescript extinguishing Javascript. If they send things to ECMA for standardization, they'll definitely prove a point in this direction.
While baking TypeScript into Visual Studio isn't a certainty of its future success (e.g. Silverlight), it is a good indicator of Microsoft's commitment to the language. As a former CoffeeScript user, I love TypeScript: it's a more consistent language driven by a real language designer, Anders Heijlsberg, author of Turbo Pascal, Delphi, C#, and now TypeScript. I am building 2 major projects using it: - RavenDB Managem…
While baking TypeScript into Visual Studio isn't a certainty of its future success (e.g. Silverlight), it is a good indicator of Microsoft's commitment to the language. As a former CoffeeScript user, I love TypeScript: it's a more consistent language driven by a real language designer, Anders Heijlsberg, author of Turbo Pascal, Delphi, C#, and now TypeScript. I am building 2 major projects using it: - RavenDB Managem…
I have a lot of respect for Anders Hejlsberg but this is a pretty unfair slight against Jeremy Ashkenas just because he hasn't created another language before. CoffeeScript was pretty revolutionary in its approach, as evidenced by the 30+ other to-JS languages that followed it. As long as you agree with its ideaology it is well designed.
I'd also argue that a community, and at the very least a team, is what designs a language and not just a single person. The language might start as a vision by a single person but ultimately it is driven by something more collaborative.
To be the contrarian here, the belief of "fixing" a dynamic language by adding static types to it is a bunch of crap.