Re:JavaScript is Eating the World
by flavio81 on Thursday August 24, 2017 @10:53AM
(#15090561)
The deeper problem is that JS is not strongly typed. Typescript gives you static type checks but the runtime is still weakly typed and will still do all sorts of weird type conversions.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:JavaScript is Eating the World
by monsieurbanana on Thursday August 24, 2017 @11:19AM
(#15090801)
Theoretically, to what extend could the weird type conversions be prevented with the use of a strict linter? My intuition would be all, but I haven't thought much about it.
Once code reaches a certain complexity level (and mind you, the threshold is rather low), you'll need dynamic generation of code and data (or else, write 10x the amount of lines of code). For this to happen in a safe way, you really, really, do need the runtime to be strictly typed.
Are you making this claim about JavaScript or as a general statement? I've probably written less than 1000 lines of JS ever (and that only for hobby projects), but I would strongly disagree with this statement as applied to C++, Java, etc.
Re:JavaScript is Eating the World
by thehardsphere on Thursday August 24, 2017 @02:45PM
(#15092830)
I'm sorry, I'm confused by the way you expressed that. The argument was you need strict typing for large projects. C++ and Java have strict typing. What exactly is the basis of your strong disagreement?
My comment is applied to any language with weak typing. Example: Javascript, PHP, and (sadly) C, particularly when using pointers to void. However, in C it's okay since there are big performance gains when you have full control of the memory.
Strong typing is a start but not enough for my taste. Static typing serves as documentation and compile time bug check, which is awesome to have. I'd like to have both, without the detour over typescript.
Re:JavaScript is Eating the World
by seanwilson on Thursday August 24, 2017 @12:50PM
(#15091732)
I don't think you're going to get strong types in standard JavaScript any time soon. Isn't TypeScript a very good compromise right now?
My take is that having dynamic typing plus strong typing is a (pretty) good compromise. And static typing plus weak typing, insufficient.
Re:JavaScript is Eating the World
by seanwilson on Thursday August 24, 2017 @08:50PM
(#15095309)
What languages would you put in these two categories?
Not all languages but here's a list:
dynamic typing, strong typing: python (for the most part), Scheme
dynamic typing, weak typing: Javascript, PHP
static typing, strong typing: Pascal, Ada, Java, C#
static typing, weak typing: C, Typescript, perhaps others
SPECIAL CASES:
strongly typed, dynamically typed, but with some compilers it can also be statically typed: Common Lisp
strongly typed, statically typed but can infer types: Haskell, ML family
strongly typed, can infer type with "auto" keyword: C++ (latest version)
non-typed: Machine language, assembler, perhaps Forth
Re:JavaScript is Eating the World
by seanwilson on Friday August 25, 2017 @01:02AM
(#15096236)
What better alternative do you have to TypeScript right now though that you can use practically with existing libraries? Perfect is the enemy of good. TypeScript can capture more complex properties than C as well.