5 ms·
I have written a full production application in CS before switching to JS and then eventually migrated to TS. I was one of the "you save characters, you gain r
by Retozi 11y ago
I have written a full production application in CS before switching to JS and then eventually migrated to TS.
I was one of the "you save characters, you gain readability" proponents as well (I love Python too).
However, it is a terribly flawed argument. Typing characters is incredibly cheap.
Debugging and refactoring in a dynamic language. However, is very time-consuming. You might be a tad slower writing Typescript (with autocompletion and typechecking, I doubt it though). But over the whole lifecycle of a codebase, Typescript is a lot faster for everything but very small projects.
I have done refactors in Typescript in hours that would have taken me days in CS... multiple times.
Additionally the human brain can adjust to predictable noise very well (brackets). After a training period, I find Javascript and Typescript almost as readable as MY Coffeescript.
However, even when developing 8 hours for multiple months in Coffeescript, I always had a hard time to grok other people's Coffeescript. There is just too much freedom.
This does not happen that easy with Javascript/Typescript.
Generally, static typing in a complex user interface is a huge huge win productivity wise. While you type more characters, you are still faster over the lifecycle of a project. Hitting keys on your keyboard is literally the least time-consuming part of programming.
- stn 11y agoStatic typing doesn't have to require typing substantially more characters though (ML-family languages are good example, other examples I can think of is Nim), the syntax choice is quite orthogonal to this but it seems like C-syntax appears in new languages mostly due to its familiarity.