[steverydz]

Type annotations can add a lot of noise to the code if you don't understand what they are. Bear in mind I'm talking about someone trying to learn something. If they don't know TS you're expectng them to boil code they don't understand down to its essence.

In regards to the jQuery comparison, I'm not suggesting that someone would ask such a question of TS. All I'm saying is that there was an expectation that everything should be done in jQuery at the time.

[kipple]

The author! Hello

> Bear in mind I'm talking about someone trying to learn something. If they don't know TS you're expectng them to boil code they don't understand down to its essence.

I agree with this, but only for people who are new to the JS language, and the content targeting them.

People using JS regularly should be able to separate out TS noise, and asking the world to avoid TS for _every_ piece of knowledge content sounds like hyperbole.

> In regards to the jQuery comparison, I'm not suggesting that someone would ask such a question of TS. All I'm saying is that there was an expectation that everything should be done in jQuery at the time.

Then why include it in your argument?

[steverydz]

> People using JS regularly should be able to separate out TS noise, and asking the world to avoid TS for _every_ piece of knowledge content sounds like hyperbole.

I have worked with junior developers who struggle with this. I am not suggesting that all knowledge has to avoid TS, only that which isn't related to it. People who are new to the language want and need to learn _actual_ JS.

It's easy to not see this as a problem when you already know TS. Yes, it is clear what TS is once you know it. Imagine not knowing TS or the concept you are trying to learn about. What part of this is TS? What part of it is the information I am trying to find?

> Then why include it in your argument?

I was simply illustrating that there can be a tendency to assume knowledge which isn't relevant to the problem being solved.