@cm0002@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@programming.dev • 17 days agoWhy indeedlemmy.mlimagemessage-square206fedilinkarrow-up11.55Karrow-down127cross-posted to: programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
arrow-up11.52Karrow-down1imageWhy indeedlemmy.ml@cm0002@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@programming.dev • 17 days agomessage-square206fedilinkcross-posted to: programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
minus-squareNoSpotOfGroundlinkfedilink2•17 days agoExcept… the compilation step doesn’t add type safety to JS. As an aside, type safety hasn’t been something I truly miss in JS, despite how often it’s mentioned.
minus-square@Lifter@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilink9•17 days agoI think they are talking about typescript which is compiled into javascript
minus-squareNoSpotOfGroundlinkfedilink2•16 days agoOk, that could be true. I assumed they meant the “building” phase that some frameworks go through.
Except… the compilation step doesn’t add type safety to JS.
As an aside, type safety hasn’t been something I truly miss in JS, despite how often it’s mentioned.
I think they are talking about typescript which is compiled into javascript
Ok, that could be true. I assumed they meant the “building” phase that some frameworks go through.