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

A 10x Faster TypeScript

devblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 943 posts

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#131

Post by dataviz1000 »

h1fra wrote: post #108
DanRosenwasser wrote: post #3

Hi folks, Daniel Rosenwasser from the TypeScript team here. We're obviously very excited to announce this! RyanCavanaugh (our dev lead) and I are around to answer any quick questions you might have. You can also tune in to the Discord AMA mentioned in the blog this upcoming Thursday.

Amazing news, but I'm wondering what will happen to Monaco editor and all the SaaS that use typescript in the browser?

Not sure if it does but the video linked in the post might answer your question? I think he is compiling vscode which includes Monaco editor which is where they are getting 10x faster stat. (I might be wrong here.) [0]

[0] https://youtu.be/pNlq-EVld70?feature=shared&t=112

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#132

Post by 999900000999 »

DanRosenwasser wrote: post #59
no_wizard wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like others I'm curious about the choice of technology here. I see you went with Go, which is great! I know Go is fast! But its also a more 'primitive' language (for lack of a better way of putting it) with no frills. Why not something like Rust? Most of the JS ecosystem that is moving toward faster tools seem to be going straight to Rust (Rolldown, rspack (the webpack successor) SWC, OXC, Lightning CSS / Parcel etc)…

We did anticipate this question, and we have actually written up an FAQ entry on our GitHub Discussions. I'll post the response below. https://github.com/microsoft/typescript-go/discussions/411 . ____ Language choice is always a hot topic! We extensively evaluated many language options, both recently and in prior investigations. We also considered hybrid approaches where certain components could be written in a nativ…

I personally find Go miles easier than Rust.

Is this the ultimate reason,Go is fast enough without being overally difficult. I'm humbly open to being wrong.

While I'm here, any reason Microsoft isn't sponsoring a solid open source game engine.

Even a bit of support for Godot's C#( help them get it working on web), would be great.

Even better would be a full C# engine with support for web assembly.

https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues/70796

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#133

Post by hoten »

jilles wrote: post #99
kaoD wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify why it's actually not that ambiguous: TS is not (and does not have) a runtime at all. Even TS-first runtimes like Deno are (1) not TS but its own thing and most importantly (2) just JS engines with a frontend layer that treats TS as a first-class citizen (in Deno's case, V8). It's hard to tell if there will even be a runtime that somehow uses TS types to optimize even further (e.g. by proving that a functi…

If you have to explain why something is not ambiguous it is by definition ambiguous.

Maybe they aren't the audience. I don't see how this is ambiguous to anyone that actually uses typescript

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#134

Post by criddell »

rat9988 wrote: post #109
pjmlp wrote: post #12

Even though I have my considerations regarding Go, I love that they picked Go instead of the fashion to go Rust that seems to be the norm now. A compiled managed language is much better approach for userspace applications. Pity that they didn't go with AOT compiled .NET, though.

>Pity that they didn't go with AOT compiled .NET, though. I was trying ot push .net as our possible language for somehow high performance executables. Seeing this means I'll stop trying to advocate for it. If even this team doesn't believe in it.

That makes sense if your project has similar constraints and requirements.

I like when Microsoft doesn't pretend that their technologies are the right answer for every problem.

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#135

Post by dimitropoulos »

dagw wrote: post #86
pjmlp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not AOT compiled C#, given the team's historical background?

There is an interview with Anders Hejlsberg here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlGza4oIleY The question comes up and he quickly glosses over it, but by the sound of it he isn't impressed with the performance or support of AOT compiled C# on all targeted platforms.

he went into more detail about C# in this one: https://youtu.be/10qowKUW82U?t=1154s

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#136

Post by Cthulhu_ »

AshleysBrain wrote: post #64
DanRosenwasser wrote: post #3

Hi folks, Daniel Rosenwasser from the TypeScript team here. We're obviously very excited to announce this! RyanCavanaugh (our dev lead) and I are around to answer any quick questions you might have. You can also tune in to the Discord AMA mentioned in the blog this upcoming Thursday.

Well-optimized JavaScript can get to within about 1.5x the performance of C++ - something we have experience with having developed a full game engine in JavaScript [1]. Why is the TypeScript team moving to an entirely different technology instead of working on optimizing the existing TS/JS codebase? [1] https://www.construct.net/en

While Go can be considered entirely different technology, I'd argue that Go is easy enough to understand for the vast majority of software developers that it's not too difficult to learn.

(disclaimer: I am a biased Go fan)

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#137

Post by dagw »

ramon156 wrote: post #121
dagw wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL:DR; - Native executable support on all major platforms - He doesn't seen to believe that AOT compiled C# can give the best possible performance on all major platforms - Good control of the layout of data structures - Had to have garbage collection - Great concurrency support - Simple, easy to approach, and great tooling

So wild that most of these points were something C# was supposed to be good at, and they all boil down to "its just not as good in C# as in Go"

Yea, sounds like cross platform AOT compiled C# not being mature and performant was a big reason that C# was rejected.

One other thing I forgot to mention was that he talked about how the current compiler was mostly written as more or less pure functions operating on data structures, as opposed to being object oriented, and that this fits very well with the Go way of doing things, making 1:1 port much easier.

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#138

Post by dimgl »

I'm really surprised by this visceral reaction to not choosing Rust. Go is a great language and I'd choose it for a majority of projects over Rust just based off of the simplicity of the language and the ability to spin up developers on it quickly. Microsoft is a big corporation.

Why _not_ use Go?

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#140

Post by totallykvothe »

jilles wrote: post #99
kaoD wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify why it's actually not that ambiguous: TS is not (and does not have) a runtime at all. Even TS-first runtimes like Deno are (1) not TS but its own thing and most importantly (2) just JS engines with a frontend layer that treats TS as a first-class citizen (in Deno's case, V8). It's hard to tell if there will even be a runtime that somehow uses TS types to optimize even further (e.g. by proving that a functi…

If you have to explain why something is not ambiguous it is by definition ambiguous.

No. Ambiguous means that a statement has many possible meanings, not simply that something might be confusing.
Post reply on HN