[vog]

That's why I'd personally prefer Flow for that. It has a more elaborate type system anyway. [1]

Moreover, Flow is pure annotation, which can be removed by Babel. And Flow is also backed by a large company (Facebook instead of Microsoft).

However, if you do want to generate JS, use a language that elminiates runtime errors almost completely, such as Elm or OCaml (through bucklescript or js-of-ocaml).

[1] The following presentation contains some scary examples of incorrect code not rejected by Typescript. I'd rather prefer Flow which errs on beeing too strict: https://djcordhose.github.io/flow-vs-typescript/elm-flow-typ...

[throwasehasdwi]

Your comment neglects to mention that Typescript debugging is generally easy because one of the design goals of typescript is to produce javascript that matches what a developer would write.

Debugging javascript produced by Babel is generally hell in comparison. The transforms done by Babel are not designed to be human readable and they generally aren't.

[vog]

Whoops, you are right. Removed the misleading part of my comment.

[coldtea]

>And Flow is also backed by a large company (Facebook instead of Microsoft).

Only Facebook doesn't care much to back or promote Flow, besides the occasional blog post, whereas Microsoft has created a whole IDE / VS Code support for it, great tooling, documentation, etc.