News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript. Parent comment

Re:JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript by jsight on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @09:46AM (#11297198)
If it can't be compiled to JavaScript reliably then how do you expect it to be compiled to WebAssembly reliably?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript by BinaryIdiot on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @10:05AM (#11297364)
Doesn't really need to be readable when compiled into WebAssembly though that I'd a goal. In that scenario it should work like any language in that you can debug in its native form.

MSIL and Java bytecode are not that readable but I mentally lump WebAssembly in the same group (though I know it isn't quite that). I feel like the end goal will be closer aligned to byte code than JavaScript.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript by jsight on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @10:24AM (#11297524)
I still don't really see the argument. It can already be debugged in its native form. I'm not sure how making the final product less readable helps with that.

WebAssembly is primarily useful from a performance standpoint.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:JavaScript libraries should be written in TypeScript by taco_emoji on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @02:40PM (#11299681)
RELIABLE, not READABLE.
[ Parent | on HN ]