I’m so bored of people bringing up NaN !== NaN when talking about “javascript’s wonkiness”. This is defined by IEEE for the floating point standard and it appears any other language using IEEE 754 (which is the majority)
You shouldn’t attempt comparing 2 floating point numbers with simply
==(or===in JavaScript) in most cases and in most languages anyways.Totally agree. Moreover I can not think of a valid scenario where you would use such a comparison
Meh, not a great article. It gets off to a pretty poor start by stating that Typescript is “risky” because it has to interact with third-party APIs that are inevitably not written in Typescript. But really, it’s still a lot less risky compared to raw JS.
A reason not mentioned here which is the only reason I would not use TS is the setup it requires just to get started
I think most are fair points, except I disagree that static types are not helpful. Static typing is preferable over dynamic typing but is difficult to do well. PHP and Python have type annotations now, and I think it would be good if JS introduced them as well. That would be a better solution than TypeScript.
It would seem to me that introducing typing to JS like in Python or PHP would just end being TypeScript, so why would it be a better solution? Do you mean it being a first class citizen in the JS world?
Yes, I mean making it a first class citizen of standard JS. That would be a step towards all JS libraries coming with type annotations without having to convert everything to TypeScript.
TypeScript is a fine language.
If only it didn’t compile to JavaScript…
