Programming

13932 readers

1 users here now

All things programming and coding related. Subcommunity of Technology.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

Hexorg@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

Refusing TypeScript is a signal that you don't care about code quality (vitonsky.net)

submitted 2 years ago by vitonsky@programming.dev to c/programming@beehaw.org

39 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] RandoCalrandian@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Refusing rust and wasm is a signal you don’t care about code quality or security

See? You can keep playing that game all the way down to the most onerous language

[–] upstream@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

Writing code that can’t be scientifically proven to be correct on all hardware it might run on means you don’t care about code quality. /s

The Internet is full of people with a bloated ego trying to justify their opinion and gatekeeping others.

I see this more and more in software as well.

Not sure if it’s always been like this, or if I just notice it more.

Same way there’s thousands of people giving you a guide to write a task list in , but as soon as you want to use anything slightly more complex than what you can learn from working a few hours with something you quickly run out of material and is usually left to fend for yourself.

[–] MrGG@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Actually, if you really care about quality and types on the front end rust+wasm is not a bad idea 🤔

Now that I've typed that and read it back, were people using TypeScript for anything other than front-end web dev?

[–] Cube6392@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It was used pretty frequently for back end APIs too

[–] MrGG@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That is disturbing. From my perspective, anyway. There are already so many great (and more appropriate) stacks for web backends, why Frankenstein a Frankenstein into it?

[–] Knusper@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well, usually because you've got a team of frontend folks needing to do a backend.

There's one other advantage, which is that you can have a compile-time shared model between backend and frontend. You also have that advantage with WASM, but not with a traditional backend/frontend technology split...

[–] abhibeckert@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Compile time is my biggest issue with TypeScript. I've used JavaScript for decades with compile time measured in, what, a millisecond or two. Having to wait for TypeScript drives me nuts.

[–] Penguincoder@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Because at the end of the day TypeScript is still Javascript and it's still bad. Just has some verbose formats to try and make weakly typed language (javascript) appear to be strongly typed. It adds more build steps to what shouldn't be there; build steps make sense for apps, they make much less sense for libraries.

https://dev.to/bettercodingacademy/typescript-is-a-waste-of-time-change-my-mind-pi8
https://medium.com/@tsecretdeveloper/typescript-is-wrong-for-you-875a09e10176

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm sorry. Whoever wrote that should give up trying to write articles. It's poorly written and will never convince anyone to change their mind. It's shit. "I know how to convince people they're wrong. Insult them. Setup a ton of strawman arguments. Genius."

Whoever wrote that is bad and should feel bad.

[–] Penguincoder@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Which one? There were multiple links in that comment.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago

Second one. Just realized there were two. Being close together and the first being long enough to get trailing "..." it all just looked like one big link when I first saw it. May just be Kbin displaying it that way.

[–] SketchySeaBeast@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Can wasm manipulate the DOM yet?

[–] abhibeckert@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

WASM allows arbitrary code execution in an environment that doesn't include the DOM... however it can communicate with the page where the DOM is available, and it's trivial to setup an abstraction layer that gives you the full suite of DOM manipulation tools in your WASM space. Libraries for WASM development generally provide that for you.

For example here's SwiftWASM:

let document = JSObject.global.document

var divElement = document.createElement("div")
divElement.innerText = "Hello, world"
_ = document.body.appendChild(divElement)

It's pretty much exactly the same as JavaScript, except you nee to use JSObject to access the document class (Swift can do globals, but they are generally avoided) and swift also presents a compiler warning if you execute a function (like appendChild) without doing anything with the result. Assigning it to a dummy "underscore" variable is the operator in Swift to tell the compiler you don't want the output.