“The days of using untyped languages on non-trivial projects are over.”

Re:“The days of using untyped languages on non-trivial proje... by tacotacotaco on Saturday July 15, 2023 @04:47PM (#36740804)

I am not against types but I do find typescript’s type system to be deficient. Additionally, functional programming is not incompatible with type systems but typescript’s type system in particular makes it more difficult.

Several of the terrible typescript projects I referred to still used property values to represent state (like your example). Just because every definition has a type doesn’t make it good code. Shitty typed code is still shitty code. My concern is that many in our industry conflate typescript with quality and stop there.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“The days of using untyped languages on non-trivial proje... by IshKebab on Saturday July 15, 2023 @05:05PM (#36740938)

> Shitty typed code is still shitty code

Yes, but it's at least code you can understand, navigate and refactor.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“The days of using untyped languages on non-trivial proje... by dylanowen on Sunday July 16, 2023 @10:02AM (#36747096)

I'm curious which part you find deficient? It's biggest downside is probably being Turing complete but that doesn't make it deficient, rather it's too easy for devs to code incomprehensible types with it.

[ Parent | on HN ]