tc39/proposal-type-annotations on Hacker News

…there is a Stage 1 proposal to take the Python/Ruby approach of bringing them into the language: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations Were that to happen, that proposal doesn't apply any type checking semantics for the…

comment by WorldMaker · 2023-03-16 · in TypeScript 5.0

…in Javascript, that would allow the browser to handle TS/Flow files without needing a compile step: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations (That's only to allow the type annotations to be there, not to have static checking in…

comment by whstl · 2023-03-02 · in You don't need a build step

…I know there's JSDoc but the normal syntax is so much better. EDIT: Looks like there's a proposal: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations

comment by whstl · 2023-02-16 · in Writing JavaScript without a build system

…that) matters. If it can't run, unaltered, in a Javascript interpreter it isn't Javascript. [0] https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations

comment by krapp · 2023-01-20 · in Pipe Operator (|>) For JavaScript

…and the JavaScript Type Annotations Proposal [1] gives me faith that we will grow past TS. [1] https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations

comment by the42thdoctor · 2023-01-13 · in Ask HN: Is TypeScript worth it?

…:) If you want to follow along, the proposal to allow type syntax to be part of JavaScript is here: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations (To repeat Daniel, there is still a huge amount of work ahead)

comment by robpalmer · 2023-01-13 · in Ask HN: Is TypeScript worth it?

…expect this to happen. There's a stage 1 ES proposal for allowing TS-like syntax in the browser: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations So there's good reason to believe this may actually happen in the next couple of years.

comment by mark_and_sweep · 2023-01-12 · in Ask HN: Is TypeScript worth it?

…normal JS syntax: (in the same way python PEP 484 – Type Hints are considered optional type hints) https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations Deno on the server side is pretty cool and uses https://swc.rs/ (Speedy Web Compiler) -…

comment by ElectricalUnion · 2023-01-05 · in Why is the JavaScript ecosystem like this?

…in that Stage 1 proposal mind you: no one is expecting runtime type hints in the near future.) [1] https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations

comment by WorldMaker · 2022-11-14 · in Deno 1.28: Featuring 1.3M New Modules

…features that might not be supported by the target JS version. The "Type Annotations" proposal ( https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations ), IIRC championed partly by the TS team, will allow type annotations with…

comment by neongreen · 2022-10-27 · in All About E: A Language That Infiltrated JavaScript

> There's even the future possibility of much of its type syntax being absorbed back into JavaScript: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations ... as comments. Which superficially resemble the syntax of type hints but do nothing.…

comment by krapp · 2022-10-09 · in TypeScript is now officially 10 years old

…There's even the future possibility of much of its type syntax being absorbed back into JavaScript: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations

comment by olitech · 2022-10-09 · in TypeScript is now officially 10 years old

> I even don't understand why browser don't start to work on supporting it directly https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations

comment by azangru · 2022-09-29 · in ReScript 10.0

…feature in certain situations, but I don't think it will happen, for back-compat reasons. [1] https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations

comment by _greim_ · 2022-06-13 · in Aleph.js – Fullstack Framework in Deno

▲ 129

TC39 Proposal: Type Annotations

story by rglover · 2022-06-08 · 163 comments

…somewhat in that direction: - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/a-proposal-for-typ... - https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments/

comment by viddo · 2022-03-23 · in Amazon Corretto 18 is now generally available

…be a strict subset of TypeScript—or at the very least future compatible—for this very reason. 1. https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments

comment by runarberg · 2022-03-17 · in Deno Is Webby

Some FAQ items address this: https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments#why-n... Various good reasons, like how it would hinder TS evolution and you'd end up having to compile TS to whatever older version of TS the slowest…

comment by hombre_fatal · 2022-03-12 · in ECMAScript Proposal: Types as Comments

▲ 65

ECMAScript Proposal: Types as Comments

story by 0xedb · 2022-03-12 · 36 comments

▲ 2

ECMAScript Proposal: Types as Comments

story by mceachen · 2022-03-11 · 1 comment

…that people seem to be asking here, so I'd recommend people to take a look at that instead: https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments/ Also the announcement: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/a-proposal-for-typ... And…

comment by Vinnl · 2022-03-10 · in First look: adding type annotations to JavaScript

…major shift; and I'm not sure the proposers have even considered the ramifications of it. [1] https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments/

comment by 015a · 2022-03-10 · in First look: adding type annotations to JavaScript

…static typing, they are not supersets of JavaScript, and thus are not relevant to this proposal. https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments/#what...

comment by madeofpalk · 2022-03-10 · in First look: adding type annotations to JavaScript

…to change type semantics later on. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/a-proposal-for-typ... https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments/

comment by madeofpalk · 2022-03-10 · in First look: adding type annotations to JavaScript

▲ 2

Hijacking ignored type annotations for other features

story by tolmasky · 2022-03-10 · 0 comments

…or a good architecture. If its behind this feature request is a different pain to be solved. [1] https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments/#comm...

comment by dlojudice · 2022-03-10 · in First look: adding type annotations to JavaScript

▲ 5

ECMAScript Proposal: Types as Comments

story by ingve · 2022-03-10 · 0 comments

As the FAQ of the proposal mentions ( https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments/#FAQ ), we believe adding runtime type checking would be untenable. This stems from both performance concerns and concerns around evolving…

comment by DanRosenwasser · 2022-03-10 · in A Proposal for Type Syntax in JavaScript

…proposed here. There is some information on the FAQ about why runtime types are a non-starter. ( https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments/#why-... ) This comment probably won't count for much - actions speak louder than…

comment by DanRosenwasser · 2022-03-09 · in A Proposal for Type Syntax in JavaScript

The FAQ addresses this: https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments#shoul... https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments#shoul... The idea is to avoid hampering competition, evolution, and innovation in the…

comment by robpalmer · 2022-03-09 · in A Proposal for Type Syntax in JavaScript

…courage to undertake it! Edit: no it's not [1], though I'm still not sure what it does mean. [1] https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments#type-...

comment by Vinnl · 2022-03-09 · in A Proposal for Type Syntax in JavaScript

https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments/#why-... > Why not define a type system for JS in TC39 instead? > TC39 has a tradition of programming language design which favors local, sound checks. By contrast, TypeScript's model…

comment by dfabulich · 2022-03-09 · in A Proposal for Type Syntax in JavaScript