TypeScript's Quiet, Steady Rise Among Programming Languages (wired.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TypeScript's Quiet, Steady Rise Among Programming Languages (wired.com)

Posted by msmash on Friday March 22, 2019 @05:27AM from the moving-trends dept.

Microsoft's programming language TypeScript has become one of the most popular languages among developers, at least according to a report published by the analyst firm RedMonk this week. Wired: TypeScript jumped from number 16 to number 12, just behind Apple's programming language Swift in RedMonk's semiannual rankings, which were last published in August. Microsoft unveiled TypeScript in 2012, and while it hasn't grown as quickly as Swift -- which has grown faster than any other language, ever since RedMonk started compiling the rankings in 2011 -- TypeScript's own ascendance is impressive, given the sheer number of available programming languages.

More and more applications these days use TypeScript. Google's programming framework Angular, the second most popular tool of its type according to data released last year by the startup NPM, is written in TypeScript. So is Vue, an increasingly popular framework finding a home both among smaller companies and tech giants like Alibaba. But RedMonk doesn't look at how many jobs are available for people skilled in a particular language, nor how many companies actually use the language. Instead, the firm tries to spot trends in developer interest by looking at how many projects on GitHub use certain languages, and how many questions are asked about those languages on the programmer Q&A site Stack Overflow. The idea is to get a sense of where the software development profession is heading.

138 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Wait a minute... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · 2019-03-22 05:30 · Score: 1

JavaScript frameworks are being written in a language other than JavaScript?!

*head explodes*
1. Re:Wait a minute... by sobachatina · 2019-03-22 05:42 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Typescript is basically JavaScript syntax with some extra type information tacked on. It runs through a compiler that produces javascript.
  I'm a fan. If you do anything even moderately complex in JavaScript you should look at Typescript. It eases a lot of the pain of using JavaScript.
2. Re:Wait a minute... by TFlan91 · 2019-03-22 05:47 · Score: 1
  
  How?
3. Re:Wait a minute... by Joce640k · 2019-03-22 05:50 · Score: 1
  
  JavaScript frameworks are being written in a language other than JavaScript?!
  *head explodes*
  
  Typescript is transformed into regular Javascript by a "compiler".
  
  --
  No sig today...
4. Re:Wait a minute... by jellomizer · 2019-03-22 05:52 · Score: 1
  
  For some reason having a compile step in the process makes developers feel important.
  Snark aside, the biggest problem with Angular, Jquery... is that we often need to include or link to a large Javascript library, for most good designs only using less then 1% of the libraries features.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
5. Re:Wait a minute... by Joce640k · 2019-03-22 05:52 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  By adding stronger typing to the language (hence the name "typescript") and better objects.
  Strong typing good. Mmmmmkay?
  
  --
  No sig today...
6. Re:Wait a minute... by AlanObject · 2019-03-22 05:54 · Score: 1
  
  They call it a "transpiler."
7. Re: Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  If you have experience with complex projects you know run-time errors are incredibly destructive. It's always best to keep as many potential errors in compile-time
8. Re:Wait a minute... by AlanObject · 2019-03-22 06:07 · Score: 2
  
  I'm a fan. If you do anything even moderately complex in JavaScript you should look at Typescript. It eases a lot of the pain of using JavaScript.
  Count me in as a fan as well.
  I never really cared for programming in JavaScript myself although I did it because that was the job at hand.
  Then I started learning Angular, and learned Typescript by following the Angular lessons. Rarely did I have to go back to the Typescript reference page. And predictably enough my JavaScript skills improved because I was writing more of it to integrate JavaScript libraries into my Angular applications.
  What I learned really was that strong type checking is really really helpful when dealing with a lot of interfaces. The IDE (I use WebStorm) auto-completion and parameter/type checking in enormously more efficient than having to continually go back to documentation (or the original source code) for what you can't remember.
  At the same time they didn't give up the option of weak type checking for when that is a better way to write things. Win-win.
9. Re: Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:15 · Score: 0
  
  Which gender is it again?
10. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:18 · Score: 0
  
  There is no such thing as a "good design" that uses Angular. I've written better, more maintinable, more responsive, and way more efficient web apps from scratch in vanilla JS, and more rapidly, than anything I've ever produced or seen produced in Angular. It's for faux-intellectual code baristas who have no idea how software works.
11. Re:Wait a minute... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · 2019-03-22 06:26 · Score: 0
  
  You posted the same comment twice in a thread. You do know that repeating the same lie doesn't make it true?
12. Re:Wait a minute... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · 2019-03-22 06:32 · Score: 0
  
  This troll was harassing CaptainDork before I made the mistake of commenting on one of his article submission months ago. Since my user name has the same initials as Chris/creimer/cdreimer/APK, I get this harassment every time I post a comment. When they aren't harassing me, they are harassing APK and neo-Nazis. Sickos.
13. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  There is something called rollup.
  It can take all your site's JS, put it into a single file, minimize it, and then it does "tree shaking" where it removes all the calls from those large libraries that are not used.
  Pretty easy, works pretty well.
14. Re:Wait a minute... by UnknownSoldier · 2019-03-22 06:58 · Score: 2
  
  > It eases a lot of the pain of using JavaScript.
  How is debugging TypeScript? Do you have to wade through obfuscated JavaScript?
15. Re:Wait a minute... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · 2019-03-22 07:06 · Score: 0
  
  Sicko, sicko, sicko.
16. Re:Wait a minute... by Wrath0fb0b · 2019-03-22 07:15 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Because it was easier to write a sane language and a transpiler than it is to fix the recursive dumpster fire that is JavaScript.
  That should really tell us something folks.
17. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:23 · Score: 0
  
  Do not project the pain you feel using JS onto others.
18. Re: Wait a minute... by pchasco · 2019-03-22 07:29 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  No. The typescript compiler generates map files for your .ts, so you debug typescript not JavaScript.
19. Re:Wait a minute... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · 2019-03-22 07:31 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not the one suffering from acute penis envy.
20. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:33 · Score: 0
  
  You are aware that you are replying to a well known Slashdot troll ...blatherblatherblather...snipsnip
  And look. You've dedicated your life to him. How supportive and thoughtful.
21. Re:Wait a minute... by UnknownSoldier · 2019-03-22 07:34 · Score: 1
  
  Considering JavaSchit was designed and implemented in 10 days and learning NOTHING from BASIC what do you expect?
  Run-time errors SUCK. Absolutely insane that you have to use this string literal HACK to turn on type safety:
  "use strict";
22. Re:Wait a minute... by dbraden · 2019-03-22 07:45 · Score: 1
  
  Should have pretty good support. The IDEs like VSCode can use "source maps" that are generated automatically during the transpile process. These files map the generated javascript to the original source. I'm not a typescript/javascript developer but I think I got the gist of it right.
23. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:58 · Score: 0
  
  If you have a large project, it is more sane to use a faster to run safer language via WebAssembly
24. Re:Wait a minute... by Joce640k · 2019-03-22 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  So the development cycle is now a three-step process?
  Great.
  
  --
  No sig today...
25. Re: Wait a minute... by Joce640k · 2019-03-22 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, that's why I use C++.
  
  --
  No sig today...
26. Re: Wait a minute... by timeOday · 2019-03-22 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  C++ attempts to implement typing, but since it doesn't impose enough rules to make guarantees about anything, it really can't be done. The thing on the other end of that pointer could be anything, or nothing.
27. Re:Wait a minute... by nitehawk214 · 2019-03-22 08:28 · Score: 1
  
  I guess you are too young to remember linking in C.
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
28. Re:Wait a minute... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · 2019-03-22 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  I know Elon Musk made it fashionable to call people pedophiles for disagreeing with him. In your case, it's just proof that you can't win an argument.
29. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 08:52 · Score: 0
  
  Wait a minute. If I have to do a big ole statically-typed-compiled-language thing for javascript why don't I just cut to the chase and use a "real" programming language like C++, Rust, C#, or even (*barf*) Java in the first place?
  Being loosey-goosey and quick and easy to type out is the entire point of a scripting language. It's not Javascript if I have to compile it.
  The fact that they're trying to add type checking to javascript is to admit that it was a stupid idea in the first place and that they should have set up a mechanism for delivering binary apps (written in, probably, Java or C++) via the web long ago. Yes, I'm fully aware of the history behind all this stuff; how JS was hacked together in a week or two, how HTML was originally just for static content, how the 'web has grown and evolved over the years-- but that just goes to show that we should have learned better by now how insanely inefficient and crappy the whole idea of "web apps" was in the first place.
  What's the alternative?
  One possible alternative was for Microsoft and Apple etc. to just sit down and decide on a common and open API for building native GUI apps and a common API for delivering them-- in other words, an API spec that any GUI library must implement and a package manager spec that to allow any user to download the program (you could even build in a spec for how to ensure that users must pay for your app for all I care!). The entire raison d'etre for web apps is to "write once run everywhere" and that would be completely moot if all the system vendors just sat down and cooperated on just the APIs for doing so. They could still compete! M$ could still implement Direct3D, Apple could still do Cocoa, Linux could still do their patchwork of stuff-- and it would all work if the API was standardized. Just a little tiny quantum of cooperation could have avoided this titanic amount of wheel re-invention!
  Hell! They could even have simply defined a common byte code to compile real languages into that would then be run in the browser (wasm, basically) and it would have avoided half of this crap.
  Seeing typescript take off is like bitter acid on my tongue. It's like having been beaten up and ridiculed in high school because you stood up and said that pop music sucks and then decades later you're sitting in a cafe and you notice that literally every person around you is talking to each other about how pop sucks and how XYZ is so much better and, like, oh-em-gee that's so true wanna be best friends? And even worse, finding out that it was the biggest asshole from way back that beat you up who is credited for popularizing the trend of disliking pop music (Microsoft, the old enemy of free software are the major pushers of typescript).
30. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 08:58 · Score: 0
  
  it's just proof...
  Here is the real proof Chris:
  
  Here are two identical posts from 2 different sock puppets:
  Crash Dummy Redux:
  https://slashdot.org/comments....
  The Original CDR:
  https://ask.slashdot.org/comme...
  
  And here is what you replied, admitting you were trolling on Slashdot along the way:
  https://slashdot.org/comments....
  
  Actually, I copied and pasted that from the Original CDR to TROLL YOU. Geez... You're so stupid.
  If I was Chris, wouldn't I have posted links to the new video all over Slashdot? I haven't seen any such links.
  Remember how you lusted after CaptainDork before I came along?
  Stupid fuck.
  The only thing is that it also proves that you are lying as usual because the comments aren't actually identical so it isn't a cut and paste, just exactly the same creimer's stupid bragging story about how fast he can supposedly read although your brain can't even understand half of what you are reading. Otherwise, your Microsoft certifications would have been passed a long time ago.
31. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 09:02 · Score: 0
  
  You can immediately assume that if you have to refactor any JS code without "use strict" then you are going to have fun. Some programmers are absolutely awesome and like to code like a cowboy. Personally, if it's something new to me and the code smells horrible, I'll quote the project as a rewrite and hope for the best.
  Yes, javascript can be a complete dumpster fire. If you have to do it in any flavor of JS, my vote is absolutely for TypeScript. I've done about a dozen node.js projects now using TypeScript, and other than the extra transpile steps, it works no different than any other node project other than the fact that IT JUST WORKS. Moving forward, I would never do a node project otherwise.
32. Re:Wait a minute... by grep+-v+'.*'+* · 2019-03-22 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  Typescript is basically JavaScript syntax with some extra type information tacked on.
  Oh!! So it's RATFOR (1976) for JavaScript. Why didn't you just say so?
  
  Hell, for that matter back in 80-ish I used a C compiler with 4 separate phases. Phase 1 was macro expansion only, the other 2 started compiling the code until the phase 4 produced linkable output. ... which you then had to link with the supporting libraries before you had something that could actually run.
  
  I don't like JavaScript, but I think I'll go look at TypeScript.
  
  --
  If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
33. Re:Wait a minute... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · 2019-03-22 09:09 · Score: 0
  
  Sicko, sicko, sicko. Sad. Fucking sad.
34. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 09:11 · Score: 0
  
  sort of like you call people "sickos" and "sad" when we all know it's you chris
  you irritating fat failure
  who the fuck keeps modding this shitmoth up
35. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 09:12 · Score: 0
  
  You know how to tell the difference between someone that knows the difference between programming languages and the poseurs that are snobs but only pretend to know the differences? The poseurs put shit like this into their posts on the internet:
  
  a "real" programming language like C++, Rust, C#, or even (*barf*) Java in the first place?
  whereas someone that actually knows the difference would be talking about how JavaScript syntax is a superset of the untyped lambda calculus and any other programming language implements some subset of some type system with various levels of soundness and higher-kinded type capabilities and what can effectively be accomplished in any given language or system (right tool for the right job.)
36. Re:Wait a minute... by ceoyoyo · 2019-03-22 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  Code barista. I like it.
37. Re:Wait a minute... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · 2019-03-22 09:22 · Score: 1
  
  sort of like you call people "sickos" and "sad" when we all know it's you chris you irritating fat failure
  What proof do you have that I'm Chris? You didn't know I existed until I commented on CaptainDork's article submission. Before me you were accusing CaptainDork of being not only Chris but also a 36-year-old woman inside a 72-year-old body. Before that it was... Joe_Dragon?
  
  who the fuck keeps modding this shitmoth up
  Proof that I'm not Chris. Think about that, asshole.
38. Re:Wait a minute... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · 2019-03-22 09:50 · Score: 1
  
  Yup, he should. Have a good weekend and don't accuse anyone of being Chris.
39. Re:Wait a minute... by HornWumpus · 2019-03-22 10:02 · Score: 1
  
  Yes.
  We will ship no code, until it compiles _and_ links. Then we zip up the source (for 'source control'), ship and go to the nudie bar for two weeks.
  Debugging is for the end users. It's all their fault anyhow, we hate them.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
40. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 10:08 · Score: 0
  
  You forgot to mention child brides as well.
  Here is what he wrote here:
  
  If all my assets were liquidated, I would still have enough cash to buy a new car and head off to Mexico to find a chica to marry.
  https://slashdot.org/comments....
  You're aware that are some states in the U.S. that allow underage marriage as young as 14 years old?
  https://slashdot.org/comments....
  As for my comment, I've heard stories of engineers retiring at 50, moving to Mexico and marrying underage girls. Since I work with ex-military, the Philippines is a popular retirement spot for marrying underage girls as well. It's all about getting the most bang for your retirement dollars.
  https://slashdot.org/comments....
  That only works if you retire to Mexico, build a mansion (by local standards), marry an underage sweet thing and bequeath all your possessions to the village.
  https://slashdot.org/comments....
41. Re: Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 10:11 · Score: 0
  
  LMFAO!!!!!! I really am not sure.... Typescript is upsetting to be honest. So many extra steps and tools, runners etc. Barf.
42. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 10:41 · Score: 0
  
  Chris is both!
43. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 11:17 · Score: 0
  
  not anyone
  just you
  you narcissistic puffbag
44. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 12:07 · Score: 0
  
  One pile of shit into another pile of shit.
  I get it. A transpiler ...
45. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 13:01 · Score: 0
  
  Well golly you made a post on twitter saying you don't come here and haven't been here in 6 months. Just like you are always trying to tell us in the comments!
46. Re: Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 13:13 · Score: 0
  
  Who needs this typing anyways? Some kind of voodoo cult of strong typing exists in industr, that promises to make programs reliable but never delivers on the promise.
47. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 13:38 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, grandpa, whatever you say
48. Re:Wait a minute... by fsck! · 2019-03-22 14:01 · Score: 1
  
  Transpiled doesn't necessarily mean obfuscated. The output of the typescript compiler is almost identical to the input, but with the type annotations removed. It also includes inline sourcemaps so your stack traces continue to be readable. Honestly, it's not a problem.
49. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 15:48 · Score: 0
  
  Creimer claims he haven't been
  Got a little mixed up between I and he there when talking about yourself in the third person Chris? Hint: Creimer claims he hasn't been.
  You are so obvious Chris.
50. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 18:09 · Score: 0
  
  Could PureScript help even better in that way?
51. Re: Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-23 04:09 · Score: 0
  
  What it delivers on is eliminating an entire class of bug that never make it to source control.
52. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-23 08:02 · Score: 0
  
  A lot of such people do know that, it's a shorthand for the real world ecosystem around a language being a bit part of why you should use it or not, particularly at scale. Python and JS are most notable for providing very fragile systems at scale, that do not age well as dependencies update.
53. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-23 17:20 · Score: 0
  
  Perhaps your head with explode even further if you look at another framework from Microsoft called Blazor.
  That one allows you to run C# in browser by running the .NET runtime on WebAssembly.
Never heard of it by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:30 · Score: 0

or the other thousands of shitty flash in the pan languages that come and go. Next!
1. Re:Never heard of it by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:49 · Score: 0
  
  That's because you're not a programmer. You have to work in this field. Why are you surprised?
2. Re: Never heard of it by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:04 · Score: 0
  
  javascript kiddies are programmers no? Guess I didnt notice while I was doing actual programming
Vue.js by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:33 · Score: 0

Stating that Vue is Typescript is a bit an exageration.
It has support for Typescript, not you are not forced to use it.
1. Re: Vue.js by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:12 · Score: 0
  
  Vue was written in Typescript. The JavaScript files you reference in your code were produced by compiling Typescript code, not handwritten.
Too bad by Luthair · 2019-03-22 05:34 · Score: 1

about that syntax though. death to postfix types, I don't care if its easier for you to parse it, the point of higher level languages is to make it easier for humans not the computer.
1. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:50 · Score: 0
  
  I'm beginning to think we should all have our own personal "perfect" language that compiles down to JavaScript.
2. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:55 · Score: 0
  
  Dude, for bringing types to Javascript (what does this function take as input? what does it return as output? what operations are allowed on this variable? where else in the code is this type used?), I would take a language that made me eat half a dog turd before I could turn on the computer.
3. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:10 · Score: 0
  
  You know, it probably would be possible to build a tool that lets you check a bunch of boxes for common language convetions and then automatically build a compiler that takes the language you just defined as input and outputs to you choice of: platform machine code, Java bytecode, C code, or javascript code.
4. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:56 · Score: 1
  
  Let's call it LCF: Language Construction Format (or Large ClusterFuck.)
5. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 09:15 · Score: 0
  
  Types are postfixed because in languages that can do proper type inference there is frequently no need to explicitly include the type annotation in the first place.
  Try it with Kotlin sometime - grab IntelliJ, turn on automatic type annotation hints in the editor and you'll rarely have to write a type annotation again.
6. Re:Too bad by ceoyoyo · 2019-03-22 09:28 · Score: 1
  
  I thought they called that C++. Every C++ program I've ever seen looks like someone started by specifying their own language.
7. Re: Too bad by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 09:58 · Score: 0
  
  It would just need to be C++ where the tick boxes made features you didn't want into compiler errors
TypeScript is a subset of JavaScript by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:40 · Score: 0

So is it ok to call it a new language?
1. Re:TypeScript is a subset of JavaScript by chispito · 2019-03-22 07:17 · Score: 1
  
  So is it ok to call it a new language?
  It is a superset.
  
  --
  The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by sobachatina · 2019-03-22 05:40 · Score: 4, Interesting

I moved from C++ to javascript as part of a very advantageous job change.
Unfortunately javascript shortly made me loathe coming to work.
We ported all our code to TypeScript and I get to feel like a real programmer again.
Strict typing is a beautiful thing. Refactoring and compile time bugs instead of runtime disasters.
1. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:51 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Amen.
  Right now I am programming in Python and, coming from a Java and C background... all I can say is that Python is the new Perl.
  You have to be a certain age to really get that comment.
  Types, do you UNDERSTAND them, motherfucker!
  Javascript is a disaster like all weakly typed languages, but Typescript is a miracle that may rescue web development. Absolutely beautiful work, brought to you by Anders Hejlsberg, the man who also created Turbo Pascal, Delphi, and Objective C. In other words, a man who has experience and proven results creating practical and elegant languages. Not made by some guy over a weekend.
2. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:56 · Score: 0
  
  I'm probably well under the age you're thinking of and I get it, you just have to be tasked with maintaining a decade-old codebase written in perl to get it. BEGIN blocks instantly make Perl one of the worst languages I've encountered. That one "feature" alone is so destructive, I'm having a hard time not breaking something at my desk just thinking about it.
3. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by jellomizer · 2019-03-22 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  I don't get the point of this language hate.
  It is about using a language that suits the needs for the development project.
  JavaScript is a Scripting Language. Don't expect Strict Typing, If you like this sort of thing, be disciplined enough to strictly type the use of you code.
  so
  var intX = 0
  var strY = ""
  In terms of compile time bugs, vs run time disasters, there a numerous tools that will validate your code.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
4. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by lgw · 2019-03-22 06:21 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  var intX = 0
  var strY = ""
  Sure, and everyone can have their own syntax for this, and not have their IDE warn them when they forget. Or, you know, it can be part of the language, making it a standard for all, including the IDE, and removing the need for the Hungarian notation clutter everywhere.
  
  In terms of compile time bugs, vs run time disasters, there a numerous tools that will validate your code.
  Yes, and a popular one is Typescript.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
5. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by PPH · 2019-03-22 06:53 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  there a numerous tools that will validate your code
  Stop calling our users tools.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
6. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:45 · Score: 1
  
  When you are accustomed to strict typing, you rely on it, and miss it when it is gone.
  When you are accustomed to weak typing, you develop a coding mindset for it, so you can naturally keeps the bugs under control. Once you have such a mindset, being forced into a strict typing environment feels needlessly constraining.
  So I would expect this is just another situation where some people love it, some hate it, and both feel completely justified in their position.
  About a decade ago when I tried to get into Javascript, I hated it, mostly because of the browser inconsistencies and inescapable need for third party frameworks to bridge that gap. I tried it again last year and found it to be 100% improved, and coding in it actually felt like a breath of fresh air. Then we moved to typescript and it just made everything feel weird.
7. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by raftpeople · 2019-03-22 07:49 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Python is a strongly typed language, so yes, it understands types just like Java. Maybe you are really referring to dynamic vs static?
8. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by flargleblarg · 2019-03-22 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  Hey! I'm a tool, you insensitive clod!
9. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  No, it does not understand types just like Java.
  Keep telling yourself that a language that lets you pass literally anything into a method and also lets you return literally anything is strongly typed.
  This is the most BASIC feature of a typed language!
10. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by ceoyoyo · 2019-03-22 09:31 · Score: 2
  
  That would be fine, if JavaScript were *used* as a scripting language. Back in the old days, when you just wanted to make a button on your web page change colours or something, cool.
  Problem is, Javascript today is used as a programming language, to write real (sizeable) programs that incorporate a decent amount of their own logic.
11. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by Waffle+Iron · 2019-03-22 13:51 · Score: 2
  
  Keep telling yourself that a language that lets you pass literally anything into a method and also lets you return literally anything is strongly typed.
  Python knows exactly what types you're passing. Python is a strongly typed language, unlike, for example, C. If you pass "NULL" to a C function that expects a buffer, you're likely to get a runtime crash and/or security exploit. If you pass "None" to a similar Python routine, the Python interpreter will throw an appropriate exception instead.
  Language typing has two different orthogonal concepts: strong vs. weak, and static vs dynamic. Dynamic/static determines whether variables are supposed to hold a certain type, and strong/weak determines whether the language itself knows (or ensures) what type any given value has. C has static, and rather weak typing; Python has dynamic, strong typing. Other examples of different combinations are Rust, with static, strong typing, and Forth, with dynamic, weak typing.
  BTW, if you feel that you are unable to master the expressiveness that comes with Python's dynamic typing, you can run pylint to get compiler-like type handholding.
12. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by phantomfive · 2019-03-22 18:25 · Score: 2
  
  Python knows exactly what types you're passing. Python is a strongly typed language, unlike, for example, C. If you pass "NULL" to a C function that expects a buffer, you're likely to get a runtime crash and/or security exploit. If you pass "None" to a similar Python routine, the Python interpreter will throw an appropriate exception instead.
  This is sophistry attempting to cover up the weakness of the Python type system. And by weakness, I mean the lousiness of it. English polymorphism, fuckers.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
13. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by Waffle+Iron · 2019-03-23 03:34 · Score: 1
  
  Enjoy your buffer overruns.
14. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by phantomfive · 2019-03-23 03:48 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, now there's some kind of false dichotomy. Any other logical fallacy you'd like to add to the list?
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
15. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by Waffle+Iron · 2019-03-23 03:56 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, using some moronic allusion to "English polymorphism" to try to weasel out of the standard definition of strong vs weak typing.
16. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by null+etc. · 2019-03-23 14:17 · Score: 1
  
  This is sophistry attempting to cover up the weakness of the Python type system.
  His argument seems far stronger than yours.
17. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by null+etc. · 2019-03-23 14:28 · Score: 1
  
  I don't get the point of this language hate.
  Nerds have to rant about something, right?
  Personally, I prefer to rant about how stupid Google product managers are. Some people, however, go apoplectic when they see any dynamically typed language. And by then, golly gosh, comes the points about how JavaScript is associated with the web, and all its brokenness, and somehow, that means that anyone who programs in JavaScript is just a hipster trying to pretend to be a professional programmer. And of course, let's not forget to bring up the point that JavaScript was created in 10 days (OMG, wasn't Git created in 10 days?), and there are some quirky side effects (e.g. 0.1 + 0.2 !== 0.3) you can use to prove that JavaScript is absolutely a brain-dead language.
  Me? I program in about 20 different languages, and program mostly in JavaScript during my day job. That makes me a wannabe programmer.
18. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by phantomfive · 2019-03-23 14:31 · Score: 1
  
  Except Python isn't strongly typed, it uses duck typing.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
19. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-23 17:29 · Score: 0
  
  WebAssembly will save web development. I'm convinced of that after I saw Blazor.
  As a .NET developer, being able to use C# both server-side and client-side on a fully async, fully multi-threaded platform (.NET Core) is like being a Node developer without the struggles of javascript.
20. Re: Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-23 19:31 · Score: 0
  
  If you are going to program that annoyingly, might as well use TypeScript.
21. Re:Typescript has restored my job satisfaction by ras · 2019-03-24 11:45 · Score: 1
  
  Python has it's own version of Typescript. It's called Python 3.6. In other words, since 3.6 Python has included the syntax for static type checking as part of the language. It doesn't actually check the types mind you, a separate tool does that: mypi. Still, it's a definite improvement on needing a separate language which is the situation Javascript finds itself in for now.
  Much as it pains me to say this, the language that has retrofitted types the best is PHP. If the types are present it does check them. In fact PHP has undergone quite the makeover. The makeover can't hide decades of truly appalling design decisions so it will always remain a clusterfuck, but nonetheless it shows what a team of very bright and well funded software engineers can do, even when given a train wreck as a starting point.
Microsoft: A Fart in a Skillet by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:45 · Score: 1

Is Microsoft even looking at long-term TypeScript development when they seem to be taking a parallel route with Blazor/WebAssembly? What's the future of .Net Framework with Core and Standard making things super confusing? What's the future of Windows as a development environment with them salivating over the mobile userbase? They've been demoting all their traditional host-your-own products and pushing people into Azure Cloud. As an employee who works behind a firewall and relies on self-hosted products and offline installers, this is one hell of a ride. Is anything they make not in some sort of major pivotal state of instability?
1. Re:Microsoft: A Fart in a Skillet by avandesande · 2019-03-22 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  For a stronger, bassier sound use a sauce pot.
  
  --
  love is just extroverted narcissism
2. Re: Microsoft: A Fart in a Skillet by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:35 · Score: 0
  
  This is the most insightful comment I have read all week.
Kickstarter for TypeScript ECMA standardization by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 05:52 · Score: 0

Need a Kickstarter to fund lobbying to get Typescript as a de facto replacement of JavaScript and an ECMA standard.
Excludes the messy history of using C within a C++ application.....*shudder*.....
Misleading article by idontusenumbers · 2019-03-22 05:54 · Score: 2

I suspect the main reason they measure github projects and stackoverflow questions isn't because they think those are good ways to measure, it's because it's the only publicly available information they have access to.
Swift's rise in popularity isn't due to Swift being a good language, it's due to 1) Apple killing ObjectiveC 2) ObjectiveC being so backwards
1. Re:Misleading article by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 08:24 · Score: 0
  
  Objective C is not backwards, and Apple isn't killing it. It's still fully supported, and will be for a long time.
2. Re:Misleading article by phantomfive · 2019-03-22 18:27 · Score: 1
  
  The weakness of Objective C is that it has the baggage of C still hanging around.
  The weakness of Swift is that it has the baggage of Objective C and C still hanging around.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
3. Re:Misleading article by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 22:20 · Score: 0
  
  It is even worse than that the compiler supports Objective-C++, and yes I use that to mix together objective classes and c++ classes.
Dont discount ECMAscript by cordovaCon83 · 2019-03-22 06:01 · Score: 0

The rise of the Rich Internet Applications has necessitated the need for strict typing. As such, I enjoy this TypeScript provided by our MS Overlords. However, ECMAscript is evolving quickly to catch up. TypeScript might get left on the side of the road as quickly as it was picked up.
1. Re: Dont discount ECMAscript by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:18 · Score: 0
  
  You have no clue what you're talking about.
2. Re: Dont discount ECMAscript by cordovaCon83 · 2019-03-22 06:32 · Score: 0
  
  I know exactly what I'm talking about. If you're not interested in refuting a claim that I made or making a counter-point then you're wasting both of our time.
TypeScript is still crap by djbckr · 2019-03-22 06:27 · Score: 3, Interesting

Lately our team has moved to TypeScript from Java to write server-side services. Now, Java is not the best thing in the world admittedly, but it's head and shoulders better than JavaScript. I think typescript is just a hack to make javascript a bit more palatable than straight JS. I think of "lipstick on a pig", but really typescript is just a really bad makeup job on a dead rotten pig.
1. Re:TypeScript is still crap by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:09 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The real failure here is a scripting language designed for web browsers being used for back end services. DON'T DO STUPID SHIT!
  If you want to use a scripting language on the back end, that's fine, but use a scripting language designed for back end work.
  TypeScript is imperfect, but leaps and bounds ahead of plain of JavaScript for front end work
2. Re:TypeScript is still crap by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 12:16 · Score: 0
  
  Less costly programmers use Javascript. Therefore, make Javascript better and use less costly programmers for your project to save $$$. Simple!
3. Re:TypeScript is still crap by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 13:02 · Score: 0
  
  The real answer is .. if we're going to give you Turing Complete in a browser, might as well write compilers targeting web assembly for everything. Fuck it.
4. Re:TypeScript is still crap by phantomfive · 2019-03-22 18:31 · Score: 1
  
  Javascript would be acceptable for the backend, and Node is very pleasant in a lot of ways......if it weren't for the whole hyper-attention-starved ecosystem of programmers that it imports with it. I swear Node programmers wake up in the morning thinking, "I haven't broken anything this week.....my life is incomplete. What can I do today to make phantomfive suffer?"
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
having used Typescript for a while by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:28 · Score: 0

My question is - is there something that does similar things, but isn't Typescript? I fucking hate Typescript.
Javascript compilers! by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 06:36 · Score: 1

Between Typescript and Grunt, I've learned to loathe JS compilers (and I already hated NodeJS). If you *need* a compiler for Javascript, then you are doing language design wrong: Fix the language, don't write a compiler for it! A compiler in the develop-test lifecycle dramatically extends the development cycle and, in web dev work, that just slows everything down. Good for job security but not much else. I can and do build bug-free JS solutions in...Javascript!
Typescript was a dead horse at the starting gate. So was grunt. Please stop beating the dead horses and bury them already.
That's an overstatement by goose-incarnated · 2019-03-22 07:03 · Score: 1

"Quiet"?

--
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
I just don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:25 · Score: 0

JavaScript is so popular, used and important and yet is still awful, nobody seems to like it enough to not keep complaining.
I doubt the language is too complex, but why to make a dialect compiler to generate the script code? Maybe is because people feel awkward or too complex or even ugly... Or they just can't handle the language.
Also it seems like all JavaScript interpreters are awful.
1. Re:I just don't get it by HornWumpus · 2019-03-22 08:50 · Score: 1
  
  Languages are _easy_, libraries are hard.
  But language features (or their lack) have huge consequences in the library.
  Everybody has to 'touch Javascript', if only to block 'big old steaming piles' of it. It sucks and everybody knows it. But until recently, it was the only game in the browser.
  Then you have the 'it's a pigfuck, but it's our pigfuck' people. They actually use JS on the server, just madness. In their defense, most don't know any other languages.
  Bluntly, it's kids reinventing _all_ the bad ideas again. e.g. lockless databases, just run all updates through a single thread...that will work. (/sarc) That's a few person decades of work that the kids could have saved with a few person hours in the library.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yeah, no by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:34 · Score: 0

I say that's not a programming language. It's wank.
But then, "the javascript community" is mostly wank by weight and by volume. By attitude even moreso.
1. Re: Yeah, no by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-23 09:04 · Score: 0
  
  I think the reason JS dev has become so wanky is because the devs involved have such an inferiority complex after being told over and over that they aren't real developers.
  They've gone out of their way to complicate their lives and suck every ounce of power and bandwidth out of computers just to do look smart when they should have been agitating for sane tools and languages.
lots of standard js hatred here by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 07:58 · Score: 0

I'd get off your lawn but I'm making too much money here.
1. Re:lots of standard js hatred here by nitehawk214 · 2019-03-22 08:41 · Score: 1
  
  You can hate something AND make money off of it.
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
This is a joke right? by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 11:13 · Score: 0

Yup. Knew it.
20 years in the making.. by AndrewFlagg · 2019-03-22 11:15 · Score: 2

@Microsoft @JavaScriptDaily been programming in Javascript for 20 years and they finally come up with TypeScript -- of all things... when I was at Microsoft I told them that back in 1995-1997, they finally agreed in 2017... https://twitter.com/Reno89512/...
1. Re:20 years in the making.. by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-22 19:31 · Score: 0
  
  I interned at Microsoft in 2011 and we used TypeScript.
Re:Wait a minute... C# vs Borland C by AndrewFlagg · 2019-03-22 11:17 · Score: 1

times change -- still love in parallel my Fortran 77 and COBOL in parallel then Borland C in comparison... I had to shelve... CP/M and my trusty HP41-CX.. still have and use my HP41-CX w/that matrix module.. batteries still exist.
Microsoft TypeScript most popular says Microsoft by najajomo · 2019-03-22 14:27 · Score: 1

“Microsoft .. TypeScript .. one of the most popular languages among developers, at least according to a report published by the analyst firm RedMonk this week.”

Yet another free advert on slashdot for the MICROS~1 organization.
Be Careful by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-23 00:21 · Score: 0

I can foresee another Oracle/Java debacle. When you trust your programming language to a single company like Microsoft, then you are dependent on whatever whims that company imposes. Sun Microsystems seemed fine with Android using its own (based off of Apache's) modified implementation of the Java Virtual Machine. But then Oracle bought Sun and subsequently sued Google for using Java's application programming interface without being licensed to do so.
I could see at some point in the future, Microsoft cracking down on anyone using Typescript and not abiding by whatever changes Microsoft wants to impose (inflict) on the Typescript community, just so Microsoft can profit off of Typescript.
1. Re:Be Careful by dwpro · 2019-03-23 05:07 · Score: 1
  
  It's open source, fork it. This sounds like old school MS fud
  
  --
  Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
Instant Language Builder [Re:Too bad] by Tablizer · 2019-03-23 08:39 · Score: 1

check a bunch of boxes for common language conventions and then automatically build a compile
That idea was pondered at C2: http://wiki.c2.com/?InstantLan...

--
Table-ized A.I.
Not again? by Anonymous Coward · 2019-03-24 06:07 · Score: 0

Another day, another programming language.