TypeScript's number type is a lie
bluepnume.medium.com
TypeScript's number type is a lie
1–7 of 7 posts
Re: TypeScript's number type is a lie
#2Am I incorrect in thinking this is not a TypeScript problem, but a problem most languages have, and that TypeScript is one of the few with a neat little solution?
Re: TypeScript's number type is a lie
#3Am I incorrect in thinking this is not a TypeScript problem, but a problem most languages have, and that TypeScript is one of the few with a neat little solution?
In most languages you could probably solve this problem with a class. But wrapping all your numbers in a class with runtime consequences, just for a bit of extra type safety, feels quite extreme.
Re: TypeScript's number type is a lie
#4Supporting operator overloading is part of the linked TS issue [1]. But I'm more curious: why did operator overloading in ES6 itself [2] die?
Re: TypeScript's number type is a lie
#5Supporting operator overloading is part of the linked TS issue [1]. But I'm more curious: why did operator overloading in ES6 itself [2] die? [1] https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/42218 [2] https://github.com/tc39/proposal-operator-overloading
Probably if nothing else, impossible to have it perform well without static typing?
Re: TypeScript's number type is a lie
#6Supporting operator overloading is part of the linked TS issue [1]. But I'm more curious: why did operator overloading in ES6 itself [2] die? [1] https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/42218 [2] https://github.com/tc39/proposal-operator-overloading
Probably if nothing else, impossible to have it perform well without static typing?
But traversing the prototype chain (to figure out method dispatch) is also potentially slow without static typing, and we're managing that ok, no?
Re: TypeScript's number type is a lie
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably if nothing else, impossible to have it perform well without static typing?
But traversing the prototype chain (to figure out method dispatch) is also potentially slow without static typing, and we're managing that ok, no?
True enough. Although personally I prefer to just use regular functions rather than big inheritance chains.