217
the myth of type safety
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
217 points (92.5% liked)
Programmer Humor
19443 readers
31 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Based on your description it sounds like you haven't given it a fair shake. I'll take TS over JS any day, at least there is room for improvement. I will say however I personally haven't been unlucky enough to run into projects that abuse the any type. The worst I've run into is a JS library with no typings I have to manually type.
I imagine what they mean is e.g. that TypeScript can tell you something is a
Date, but it doesn't attempt to fix some of the confusing, quirky behaviour with that: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Date#interpretation_of_two-digit_yearsSo, yes, it's generally better than JS, but it doesn't actually make it good/attractive, if you're used to the sanity of backend languages. It very much feels like lipstick on a pig.
Exactly this. I'd rather use TypeScript than regular JS, but I enjoy using almost any other statically-typed language more (except maybe C++) because TS has the potential to be just as bad as JS for codebases where it isn't being used correctly (this is true for other languages as well but it's usually a lot more obvious).
Not that it isn't possible to have good typescript code, but rather that code becomes a lot harder to maintain because of problems that could've been prevented at a language level (truthy/falsey logic, 'any' type being allowed by default rather than 'unknown,' etc)