On the current typescript / anti-typescript internet drama I saw someone mention javascript without a build step.

Do you think we’re already there?

Last time I attempted it:

  • there were too many libraries I couldn’t import
  • JSX (using babel) had a warning saying you shouldn’t do it in the browser for production
  • there was some advice against not using a bundler, because several requests for different .js files is slower and bigger than a bundled package
  • icesentry@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you want type safety and no build step you do like svelte did and use jsdoc instead. You can run the typescript type checker on those annotations so if you care about not having a build step you can still have type safety.

    • realharo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That sounds like spending a lot of extra effort just to avoid a little up-front effort.

      • icesentry@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How is it extra effort? It’s just a comment instead of inline types. It’s not like going from no types to types everywhere.

      • icesentry@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s litterally less step. It’s just a comment above a function. How is that more steps?

        I mean, don’t get me wrong, I don’t mind build step but this is objectively less steps.

        • Rooki@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          In typescript you dont comment before there you see the variable name and that (should be enough) and the type is there…