On Friday, 11 September 2015 at 16:07:09 UTC, Sebastiaan Koppe
wrote:
I never understood those TypeScript people. They would learn a
*new* language, just to compile it into JavaScript?
It isn't a new language. It is where ECMAScript is going +
structural typing and generics. The typing helps with catching
errors at compile time and gives you much better IDE support
(completion).
It would be nice to have a stricter version of it, but what is
good about TS is that you can put static typing over existing
code bases that are pure Javascript (and browser APIs). So it is
very interoperable, but not strict.
Maybe there are so many tools for JavaScript, because it is so
simple?
And if you are in the JavaScript-is-evil camp, it is already
obvious that there are so many tools.
In either case, they are not doing better. It is their natural
course of action.
Not sure what you meant by "natural course". The JavaScript/HTTP
platform is doing better because the tool developers are forced
to be interoperable with what is there (browsers/http).
That means it is more obvious that inventing an isolated universe
is a bad idea, and that you need 100% interoperability to do
well, not 50%.
If D had 100% interop with C++ then it would do much better,
selling a 50% solution is difficult. But that would take radical
changes...
