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

Announcing TypeScript 1.0

blogs.msdn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 118 posts

Re: Announcing TypeScript 1.0

#51

Post by radicalbyte »

We've been using TypeScript for 9 months now on a large project. It's fantastic. There's now way I'll go back to pure JavaScript again.

The type system just catches so many defects, and they're of the kind that are hard and boring to find (typos).

Plus IntelliSense integration (including jsdoc) is great.

On the downside, our project takes some time to compile so we had to build a tool to do it incrementally. Plus it doesn't play well with one-class-per-file structures (but I expect that to be fixed).

Re: Announcing TypeScript 1.0

#52

Post by axefrog »

radicalbyte wrote: post #51

We've been using TypeScript for 9 months now on a large project. It's fantastic. There's now way I'll go back to pure JavaScript again. The type system just catches so many defects, and they're of the kind that are hard and boring to find (typos). Plus IntelliSense integration (including jsdoc) is great. On the downside, our project takes some time to compile so we had to build a tool to do it incrementally. Plus it…

Agreed, TypeScript is great, but the compiler is excruciatingly slow. I have to segment my app into multiple sub-build areas and only build a subset at a time, which is annoying because I frequently end up making small changes outside of that subset of code. My app is only around 25000 lines of code and a full compilation still takes around 50-60 seconds which, in a JavaScript workflow, is a lot of friction.

Re: Announcing TypeScript 1.0

#53

Post by bilalhusain »

couchand wrote: post #46
bilalhusain wrote: post #37

The typescript playground[1], which lets you try TypeScript in your browser, looks so professional and finished when compared to CoffeeScript[2] or Dart[3]. As someone who attempted a half-baked Rust to JavaScript transpiler[4], I am floored with the packaging of TypeScript (tutorials, specs, editor integrations, npm, playground). At the moment, the only missing feature that my jealousy could point out is autoscrolli…

I don't think any of them are very polished or professional. The CoffeeScript site reports errors unintuitively yet visibly in the top-right corner. The TypeScript site requires that you scroll right to the error and then realize it's not just your browser complaining about a misspelling. But both are better than the Dart sandbox, which basically only says "error". None of them get page layout right. Dart and TypeScr…

I hope the respective developers are listening. It should be noted that most of these 'try X' editors are not marketed as a product, but I do agree that calling it 'professional' was mistake. The warts show up during heavy usage of a tool (the overflow example) and I was quick to reach conclusions based on the first impressions. But all the features like completion, line numbers, syntax highlighting do deserve respect (I couldn't find a better executed alternative!).

Also, confirming that I am on a Windows computer :)

Re: Announcing TypeScript 1.0

#54

Post by sytelus »

Having spent quite a bit of my dev life with typed languages and now coding a LOT in pure JavaScript, I'm actually not at all thrilled by TypeScript. Yes, pure JS is bit hard to maintain and it does occasionally pisses me off but at the same time it is liberating.

Not having to constantly keep adding types all over, not having to constantly refactor things because I now accept object instead of an int etc is refreshing. And best of all, not having compile at all is fast and simple. I'm only using JS frameworks that doesn't force me do build before testing the page and retains purity of JavaScript (that means no simulations of traditional OOP). Yes, sometime I do make bad mistakes and spend some time chasing down bugs that would have been caught in typed languages. However overall I find cost of adding types all over and maintaining them over the evolution of code is actually higher. It would have been really great if they had produced cool algorithms that could have inferred types as much as possible and added it as static analysis tool instead of JS extension.

Just because JS doesn't have type checking I'm now set in to mindset of doing quick tests of small changes, write more elaborate tests and so on. Even in moderately large project I think pure JavaScript is not only maintainable but also joy to work with compared to typed languages.

Re: Announcing TypeScript 1.0

#55

Post by pjmlp »

sytelus wrote: post #54

Having spent quite a bit of my dev life with typed languages and now coding a LOT in pure JavaScript, I'm actually not at all thrilled by TypeScript. Yes, pure JS is bit hard to maintain and it does occasionally pisses me off but at the same time it is liberating. Not having to constantly keep adding types all over, not having to constantly refactor things because I now accept object instead of an int etc is refreshi…

> Even in moderately large project I think pure JavaScript is not only maintainable but also joy to work with compared to typed languages.

You will see that joy quickly fade away in enterprise projects.

Re: Announcing TypeScript 1.0

#56

Post by skrebbel »

Most significant announcement IMHO:

> Today, we're announcing that we will begin taking pull requests for the TypeScript compiler and language service.

A relatively-flagshippy MS project becomes truly open source. This is awesome!

Re: Announcing TypeScript 1.0

#57

Post by pingec »

sytelus wrote: post #54

Having spent quite a bit of my dev life with typed languages and now coding a LOT in pure JavaScript, I'm actually not at all thrilled by TypeScript. Yes, pure JS is bit hard to maintain and it does occasionally pisses me off but at the same time it is liberating. Not having to constantly keep adding types all over, not having to constantly refactor things because I now accept object instead of an int etc is refreshi…

>Not having to constantly keep adding types all over

You don't have to if you don't want to.

>not having to constantly refactor things because I now accept object instead of an int etc is refreshing

Again this is your choice, you can omit types if you want

TS gives you the option to add typing if you want it. And that is huge in my book, try refactoring a large enterprise app written in JS vs. written in TS.

Re: Announcing TypeScript 1.0

#59

Post by bsaul »

keithwarren wrote: post #16
bsaul wrote: post #5

This project really is the greatest thing that could happen in computer science : a great mind trying to solve a problem in the most pragmatic yet elegant way to achieve the greatest possible benefit for developper with th minimal amount of time and work.

A little strong on hyperbole. Less Flair version - Happy to see a well know and respected computer scientist trying to solve a problem faced by lots of developers and doing it in a simple and easy to understand way.

Agree. I wanted to put some emphasis on the fact that technologies with modest goals, but well executed, may in fact achieve more than grand masterplans. After more than 15 years of coding I came to realize that focusing very strongly to your true needs and nothing more, is really a quality met only by the very advanced.

Re: Announcing TypeScript 1.0

#60

Post by camus2 »

axefrog wrote: post #52
radicalbyte wrote: post #51

We've been using TypeScript for 9 months now on a large project. It's fantastic. There's now way I'll go back to pure JavaScript again. The type system just catches so many defects, and they're of the kind that are hard and boring to find (typos). Plus IntelliSense integration (including jsdoc) is great. On the downside, our project takes some time to compile so we had to build a tool to do it incrementally. Plus it…

Agreed, TypeScript is great, but the compiler is excruciatingly slow. I have to segment my app into multiple sub-build areas and only build a subset at a time, which is annoying because I frequently end up making small changes outside of that subset of code. My app is only around 25000 lines of code and a full compilation still takes around 50-60 seconds which, in a JavaScript workflow, is a lot of friction.

Agreed, TypeScript is great, but the compiler is excruciatingly slow.

This. at least the js one. Maybe VS is bundled with a Typescript compiler written in C# , i dont know,but clearly the javascript one is damn slow.

Post reply on HN