[aew4ytasghe5]

Both are your personal experiences, neither of those are a valid tradeoff.

My experience with js-land is that choosing a typescript and make use of the @types packages is _the_ modern way of doing js dev. What you describe is basically do the same people did 15 years ago.

That is not a trade-off, but a refusal to re-evaluate the situation under changing conditions.

[capableweb]

I'm sorry but if you don't understand what tradeoffs are nor understand what tradeoffs are involved with choosing between JavaScript and TypeScript, I don't think there is much left for us to discuss.

[selfmodruntime]

>I'm sorry but if you don't understand what tradeoffs are nor understand what tradeoffs are involved with choosing between JavaScript and TypeScript, I don't think there is much left for us to discuss.

You've yet to provide even a single example.

[camgunz]

The typescript compiler is slow, and sometimes you have to escape hatch the type system, or use libraries that aren't typed. Type annotations can be pretty complicated, and at least sometimes are very noisy and make code less readable. You probably have tests anyway, and depending on your problem space, type errors may be such a small proportion of your errors that a using a type checker isn't justifiable. Finding an error in your typescript code from a JavaScript error message is hard and frustrating (there is always a source map bug).

As an aside, at least to me your posts are coming off as really combative in this thread. You might get more constructive responses if you adopted a more curious, open tone.

Edit: found this on page... 4 of HN? https://twitter.com/swyx/status/1350427690814251010 .

[selfmodruntime]

Now that is a good example. I've encountered the problem of compile times myself. I've asked Daniel Rosenwasser about reimplementing the TSC compiler in a compiled language for a better speedup, but he said it wasn't worth the hassle because the compiler moves so fast and the spec is pretty vast at it's current state.

> type errors may be such a small proportion of your errors that a using a type checker isn't justifiable

This is a bit biased. The major advantage I see in using typescript is that you can be certain an interface is exactly what it says it is.

> As an aside, at least to me your posts are coming off as really combative in this thread

You are correct in this. Sorry. I will fix my comments to come off as less abrasive.

[camgunz]

> I've asked Daniel Rosenwasser about reimplementing the TSC compiler in a compiled language for a better speedup, but he said it wasn't worth the hassle because the compiler moves so fast and the spec is pretty vast at it's current state.

Oh super interesting! I wonder if the solution is like, tsc becomes a reference compiler. I'm pretty sure people would absolutely love a Rust implementation that was fast but a little behind. A lot easier to daydream about than to do though, haha.

> This is a bit biased. The major advantage I see in using typescript is that you can be certain an interface is exactly what it says it is.

Yeah and I do miss this in dynamic languages. Interfaces (and typed data structures) have great descriptive power just on their own. There are run time packages for this (prop-types, etc) but... run time is worse haha.