[adminu]

Hoenstly, for production code, TS makes me sleep better. No matter how many tests you write, that one undefined object will get you at some point. TS helps to eliminate a complete set at compile time (as you know) and that's great!

Anecdotal evidence from my Haskell experience: If my Haskell programs compiled, they usually worked. Which is amazing. Powerful types for the win.

[jamil7]

> Anecdotal evidence from my Haskell experience: If my Haskell programs compiled, they usually worked. Which is amazing. Powerful types for the win.

I have the same feeling regarding Haskell, Elm and Swift, the latter I program in 99% of the time. I really don't feel like I get the same sense of security from Typescript, to be honest. Maybe I'm not using it correctly? I tend to lean more towards OP's opinion. I would probably prefer something like Rescript, but haven't looked much into it.

[mchaver]

Rescript and its standard library Belt are great. I have been using BuckleScript/ReasonML/Rescript since 2018. It gives better guarantees than TypeScript and has a stronger focus on the functional approach to problems. The only drawback is it has less documentation than TypeScript, and you will likely have to write bindings for JS libraries you want to use.

[jamil7]

Thanks for sharing, I'm definitely going to dig into it more.

[IshKebab]

I agree Typescript doesn't give "if it compiles it works" but it does give "if it compiles there aren't totally noddy errors like typos". And it gives you a codebase that is understandable and maintainable which JavaScript does not.