[eropple]

> I spent more time working on the types than on the actual code.

That's interesting. I very strongly don't, when writing TypeScript (but I don't then also mess around with a second type system on top of it). Better Intellisense and fail-up-front checking means I write code much, much faster.

I didn't have to change my coding style because this is already how I wrote code; I now have the tools to actually do it well.

TypeScript is not a "complex dynamic" language unless you step outside its bounds. Which, sure, sometimes you need to; it's not perfect, and one of its advantages is being able to opt out when absolutely necessary. Then you fence off that type-unsafe code by strongly testing before you hand something back into TypeScript because you're a competent programmer who understands the limitations of your tools. But that happens so very, very rarely that optimizing for that corner case seems foolish.

[ItsMe000001]

How much time you spend depends on your data structures. If the easy default options are good enough you don't need to sweat. We make heavy use of disjoint unions, and while the simple case here too is easy, some things that we do - although they still are very simple on the Javascript side - are hard on the type checker (Flow in this case).

> TypeScript is not a "complex dynamic" language

I don't know what you read into my comment, but if you just stick to what I wrote, Javascript certainly is, and TypeScript is just Javascript (the type annotations are a separate thing). I'm not sure what your point is overall I have to admit, it's a bit on the defensive side for no reason that I can see. For whatever reason you seem to feel personally attacked ("I didn't have to change my coding style")? I refer back to what I wrote, point for point. Would it please be allowed to write down my observations? Especially when it is base don years of practice in all the relevant technologies (JS, TS, Flow) and I'm not just making stuff up without having data (i.e. actual experience). Plenty of other people wrote similar comments here.

[eropple]

I don't feel defensive, but I do find your comments interesting and your experience almost diametrically opposed to mine--which is what I said.

JavaScript is quite complex and quite dynamic, but the reason TypeScript got me back into doing web stuff was, by and large, because it removes that except for in clearly delineated places (at least, once you turn on strict mode).

You're reading in some stuff that isn't intended.

[ItsMe000001]

> You're reading in some stuff that isn't intended.

What a coincidence, same thing I said to you! Why do you make a stupid reply when you know it's stupid?

[dang]

We've banned this account for violating the site guidelines and ignoring our request to stop.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html