JSR: The JavaScript Registry

Man, if only they'd debuted with this, but, hindsight and all. My only thing is that TypeScript has no spec, standard, or competing implementations so it seems a bit risky to treat it as a first-class citizen as far as publishing packages goes.

Re: JSR: The JavaScript Registry

#5

Post by franky47 » Fri, Mar 01, 2024, 1:56 PM UTC

I get their stance on TypeScript "exported types must be explicit and not use inference", but I feel like this is going to cause a lot of friction in adoption.

Re: JSR: The JavaScript Registry

#6

Post by lucacasonato » Fri, Mar 01, 2024, 1:57 PM UTC

imbnwa wrote: post #4

Man, if only they'd debuted with this, but, hindsight and all. My only thing is that TypeScript has no spec, standard, or competing implementations so it seems a bit risky to treat it as a first-class citizen as far as publishing packages goes.

The TypeScript syntax is very stable - there is no spec, but it's very stable. The type system on the other hand: not very stable, and yeah I agree - that would be risky to rely on.

However as JSR only relies on the syntax, not on the type system, it's no problem :)

Re: JSR: The JavaScript Registry

#7

Post by imbnwa » Fri, Mar 01, 2024, 2:02 PM UTC

lucacasonato wrote: post #6

imbnwa wrote: post #4

Man, if only they'd debuted with this, but, hindsight and all. My only thing is that TypeScript has no spec, standard, or competing implementations so it seems a bit risky to treat it as a first-class citizen as far as publishing packages goes.

The TypeScript syntax is very stable - there is no spec, but it's very stable. The type system on the other hand: not very stable, and yeah I agree - that would be risky to rely on. However as JSR only relies on the syntax, not on the type system, it's no problem :)

Is not the 'slow types' problem[0] a type system dependency, or am I missing something?

[0]https://jsr.io/docs/about-slow-types

Re: JSR: The JavaScript Registry

#8

Post by lucacasonato » Fri, Mar 01, 2024, 2:06 PM UTC

franky47 wrote: post #5

I get their stance on TypeScript "exported types must be explicit and not use inference", but I feel like this is going to cause a lot of friction in adoption.

1. You can bypass slow types checks during publishing. You will just get a lower JSR score.

2. TypeScript is shipping features in the next release (TS 5.5) has quick-fixes in the editor to make it super easy to add explicit types :) The TS feature is called `isolatedDeclarations`

Re: JSR: The JavaScript Registry

#9

Post by lucacasonato » Fri, Mar 01, 2024, 2:06 PM UTC

imbnwa wrote: post #7

lucacasonato wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The TypeScript syntax is very stable - there is no spec, but it's very stable. The type system on the other hand: not very stable, and yeah I agree - that would be risky to rely on. However as JSR only relies on the syntax, not on the type system, it's no problem :)

Is not the 'slow types' problem[0] a type system dependency, or am I missing something? [0] https://jsr.io/docs/about-slow-types

It does not use TSC / do type analysis. This is purely syntax analysis.

The "slow types" restriction specifically exists because JSR does not use TSC or do type analysis :)

Re: JSR: The JavaScript Registry

#10

Post by imbnwa » Fri, Mar 01, 2024, 2:08 PM UTC

lucacasonato wrote: post #9

imbnwa wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is not the 'slow types' problem[0] a type system dependency, or am I missing something? [0] https://jsr.io/docs/about-slow-types

It does not use TSC / do type analysis. This is purely syntax analysis. The "slow types" restriction specifically exists because JSR does not use TSC or do type analysis :)

Ah, I see