| > Give it a try some time! If you mean give TypeScript a try, I have! In production. And it was very solid. I haven't yet tried the JSX tooling, since that's a somewhat recent development and predates my last serious use of TypeScript. > I also wouldn't say TypeScript strives to focus on OO features Every single tutorial and howto I've ever read for TypeScript, official or otherwise, has emphasized the OO capabilities of TypeScript. And for good reason, TypeScript adds multiple OO features, and features associated with OO languages like Java and C#. I've heard more than one C# dev say that it feels almost like programming in C#. So I don't think I'm off base here. That said, it's great that you're looking to emphasize your support for more traditional/idiomatic JS as well, as well as your support for React. (and I admit I'm surprised you don't use any classes in the compiler. Every TypeScript project of significant size I've ever seen uses lots of OOP. But I'm sure you're aware of many that don't.) I do wish that TypeScript had disjoint union/sum types like Flow does, but I just checked and it looks like you might be seriously considering it! That's great. Actually, it looks like you're getting closer to the behavior I'd like with your recent string literal type PR. If you add some nice to use type guards, I could program in TypeScript in somewhat approximating the style I've come to love with Rust/Ocaml/Elm/Scala. There's no way you could encode exhaustivity checks to that, is there? I'm pretty sure that would require true disjoint unions, right? In any case, I'll have to take another look at TypeScript, I'm glad to see you're pushing things forward. I'll keep my fingers crossed that you'll end up adding disjoint unions as well. |