Live data from Hacker News

A 10x Faster TypeScript

devblogs.microsoft.com

471–480 of 943 posts

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#472
post #451

The post title is a bit misleading. It should say a 10x faster build time, or a 10x faster TypeScript compiler . tsc (compiler) is 10x faster, but not the final TS program runtime. Still an amazing feat! But doom will not run faster "To meet those goals, we’ve begun work on a native port of the TypeScript compiler and tools. The native implementation will drastically improve editor startup, reduce most build times by…

Agree. TypeScript is primarily a programming language. Did they make the language faster? No. Hence, the title is misleading.

For anyone who uses TypeScript on a daily basis it's not ambiguous at all. Everyone who works with TS knows the runtime code is JavaScript code that is generated by the TypeScript compiler. And it's also pretty common knowledge that JavaScript is quite fast, but TS itself is not.

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#473
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can think of a DOOM that WILL run faster… https://youtu.be/0mCsluv5FXA

Ah thanks! I didn't realize there was a Doom running on the TS type system. I stand corrected

That is a really funny coincidence. Of all the examples you could have picked...

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean, I can't think of a time a high profile project written in a lower level representation got ported to a higher level language. Prisma is currently being rewritten from Rust to TypeScript: https://www.prisma.io/blog/rust-to-typescript-update-boostin... > Yet projects inevitably get to the stage where a more native representation wins out. I would be careful about extrapolating the performance gains achieved b…

I think the Prisma case is a bit of a red herring. First, they are using WASM which itself is a a low-level representation. Second, the performance gains appear primarily in avoiding the marshalling of data from JavaScript into Rust (and back again I presume). Basically, if the majority of your application is already in JavaScript and expects primarily to interact with other code written in JavaScript, it usually doe…

> First, they are using WASM which itself is a a low-level representation.

WASM is used to generate the query plan, but query execution now happens entirely within TypeScript, whereas under the previous architecture both steps were handled by Rust. So in a very literal sense some of the Rust code is being rewritten in TypeScript.

> Basically, if the majority of your application is already in JavaScript and expects primarily to interact with other code written in JavaScript, it usually doesn't make sense to serialize your data, pass it to another runtime for some processing, then pass the result back.

My point was simply to refute the assertion that once software is written in a low level language, it will never be converted to a higher level language, as if low level languages are necessarily the terminal state for all software, which is what your original comment seemed to be suggesting. This feels like a bit of a "No true Scotsman" argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

> As for the "compilers are special" reasoning, I don't ascribe to it.

Compilers (and more specifically lexers and parsers) are special in the sense that they're incredibly well suited for languages with shared memory multithreading. Not every workload fits that profile.

> The old cases I would choose the scripting language (familiarity, speed of adding new features, ability to hire a team quickly) seem to be eroding in the face of LLMs.

I'm not an AI pessimist, but I'm also not an AI maximalist who is convinced that AI will completely eliminate the need for human code authoring and review, and as long as humans are required to write and review code, then those benefits still apply. In fact, one of the stated reasons for the Prisma rewrite was "skillset barriers". "Contributing to the query engine requires a combination of Rust and TypeScript proficiency, reducing the opportunity for community involvement." [1]

[1] https://www.prisma.io/blog/from-rust-to-typescript-a-new-cha...

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#475
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultimately the solution has to be breaking the browser monopoly on JS, via performance parity of WASM or some other route, so that developers can dogfood in performant languages instead across all their tooling, front end, and back end.

First, this thread and article have nothing to do with language and/or application execution performance. It is only about the tsc compiler execution time. Second, JavaScript already executes quickly. Aside from arithmetic operations it has now reached performance parity to Java and highly optimized JavaScript (typed arrays and an understanding of data access from arrays and objects in memory) can come within 1.5x ex…

Very short, succinct and informative comment. Thank you.

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#476

Typescript was the best thing that ever happened to the web! Thanks Daniel, Ryan and Anders and the rest of the team for making development great for over 10 years! This improvement is amazing!

>Typescript was the best thing that ever happened to the web!

My development in regards to language:

- Javascript sucks I love Python.

- Python sucks I love Typescript.

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#477
Very pumped to see how this improves the experience in VSCode.

I've been revisiting my editing setup over the last 6 months and to my surprise I've time traveled back to 2012 and am once again really enjoying Sublime Text. It's still by far the most performant editor out there, on account of the custom UI toolkit and all the incredibly fast indexing/search/editing engines (everything's native).

Not sure how this announcement impacts VSCode's UI being powered by Electron, but having the indexing/search/editing engines implemented in Go should drastically improve my experience. The editor will never be as fast as Sublime but if they can make it fast enough to where I don't notice the indexing/search/editing lag in large projects/files, I'd probably switch back.

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#479
post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This already exists, Static TypeScript https://makecode.com/language https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/static-...

If it is not supported by the same team that supports typescript it is not really usable in real world applications.

I guess the same applies for using Go then.

Re: A 10x Faster TypeScript

#480
post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "given that C# was famously created by the guy writing the blog post" What is this logic? "You worked on C# years ago so you must use C# for everything"? "You must dictate C# to every team you lead forever, no matter what skills they have"? "You must uphold a dogma that C# is the best language for everything, because you touched it last"? Why aren't you using this logic to argue that they should use Delphi or Turbo…

Yes, but C# is the Microsoft language, and I would say TypeScript is 2nd place Microsoft language (sorry F# folks - in terms of popularity not objective greatness of course). So it's not just that the lead architect of C# is involved in the TypeScript changes. It's also that this is under the same roof and the same sign hangs on the building outside for both languages. If Ford made a car and powered it with a Chevy e…

It's a bad look for both C# and TypeScript. Anybody starting a new code base now would be looking for ways to avoid both and jump right to Go.
Post reply on HN