[hackerbob]

We've been throw this game before: CoffeeScript

Until TS becomes an official standard supported by ECMAScript out of the box. Were just going along with what feels or looks good and the javascript community has proven that can change from year to year.

[danenania]

Well, I was huge fan of CoffeeScript, so you’ve got me there. I don’t regret a single one of the (many) times I used it though. It made me and the teams I was part of significantly more productive and allowed us to produce more concise and maintainable code than we could have with plain JS. I feel the same about TypeScript today except honestly the productivity gains are a lot more dramatic.

[Yaggo]

As a former coffeescript fan, doesn’t the extra “clutter” in typescript syntax bother you?

I like CS very much myself. While I can see the benefit of having type system (in certain projects), I just can’t get over the aesthetic/syntax issue.

[true_religion]

For me, not really. If I want to use type annotation, I need to write the types somewhere in order to communicate it to future readers.

I would much rather do it via Typescripts annotations than JSDocs.

It's not clutter as it was deemed necessary by the writer (me).

If I don't want to use type annotations, I simply don't add them and Typescript does not force you to do so unless you tell it to.

[danenania]

For me, most of the key CS features that made me reach for it all ended up in ES6. And while I also prefer CS indentation to braces, I don't see that as very important.

[jhall1468]

I mean, that requirement (supported by ECMAScript out of the box) means you can't even use babel on the front-end since stage 4 isn't necessarily supported until the next release.

Types aren't coming to ECMAScript anytime soon and with flow and TS it's probably time to get used to the syntax.