A machine cannot (feel the shame of any and Record<unknown, unknown>)
Therefore
A machine must never (write typescript)
Discussion
Loading...
Post
@jonny I wonder if you, like me, find typescript problematic for the same reasons. Beyond the inscrutable errors of `tsc`, I am annoyed that it's a project owned by a large mega-corp (pushing the AI fascism), provides no runtime safety guarantees, there's no spec and no push to get it standardized as formal ECMAscript.
Sorry this is a friday night rant. I haven't had to use ts much for 6+ months and you reminded me that I still dislike it.
@r343l @jonny
Last time I regularly created computer instructions in Java™️ was 2010.
Then someone thought, “let’s shim JVM bytecode and strict typing in “prototypical” JavaScript” but only in the code, not the runtime browser (other part of JVM).
That’s a big lift for “missing the dopamine hit from coding in Java”.
Alt: Pooh bear, sitting with a pensive expression on his face, right arm folded under his left and his left paw tapping his temple, saying, “Think, think, think!”.
@r343l
I dont choose to use it myself usually and opt for minimizing the amount of JS I have to write and inflict upon others. In this case it is a work choice between being drowned in slop vs. at least protecting some code with my name on it from being 50% dead code and fallback conditions by volume.
It also blows my mind that there is strictly no such thing as introspection or runtime checking and whatnot, and think the returns on tedium and persnicketiness are negative for small-medium projects, but its worth it for larger projects, but again I do not choose to write large JavaScript things.
@jonny It's all just transpiled to actual JS so that's why none of those useful things are available. For larger projects it helps a lot, yes, but it is SO easy to have an illusion of type safety. Plus the part where developers have to understand Yet Another Thing that can break and is even further from what the computer is actually doing.
@r343l @jonny yes my least favorite part by far is that the type safety isn't real. If you work on a project that allows the use of "any" then you do not have a type safe project. I unfortunately work on a large TypeScript codebase where people like to use any. I regularly have to fix bugs that are a direct result of using the incorrect types due to "any".
I will say I still mostly like it, because I like having types, but I hate that they're just fake and in the end it's just JavaScript.
@r343l
I do like the type system and wish it was real though.
@jonny Yeah. I have done some rust and currently doing C# for the first time really. C# is kind of a mess in some ways but sure is nice when I refactor something and if it compiles and it previously worked it usually ... just works! Never really had that with typescript unless I was very very careful. Found myself too often having to dig through minor version release notes to figure out syntax.
bonfire.cafe
A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate
Automatic federation enabled