You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Almost all statically typed languages get compiled to something much less type-strict. This is one of the reasons for writing compilers in the first place! Case in point: Haskell gets compiled to assembler. You can't get a much bigger difference between typing disciplines than that.
This breaks the HN guidelines by calling names and turning an otherwise substantive (indeed, correct) comment into a personal attack. Please don't be nasty here, regardless of what the other person did or how mistaken they are. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11297077 and marked it off-topic.
(Edit: I just noticed the discussion downthread— didn't mean to pile on.)
Not everyone is capable of looking past personal attacks like yours. It is the first step to a flame war.
You have something to say? Great. Just say it, no need to talk about how little the other person knows.
Aside from "two wrongs don't make a right," do you really feel that this is comparable?
I love the idea of type script but transpiling it down into a language that isn't as type strict just seems silly to me.
And..
You obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
If you honestly, in your heart of hearts, feel that both statements are ballpark same level of cordiality, then ok.
Just as you say, we're human, which is why "not everyone is capable of looking past personal attacks". Moreover, what we regard as "personal attacks" varies from person to person. Personally, I felt insulted by the specific kind of ignorance displayed by BinaryIdiot in his posts in this thread.
I know I shouldn't have and I don't think the downvotes are undeserved. On the other hand, I obviously have my reasons for feeling that way; judging by the font color of many BinaryIdiot's posts I wasn't the only one.
I read through all the posts in this thread before posting. BinaryIdiot talking about how he experienced "transpiling languages" in the form of CoffeeScript and so he knows everything there is to them... That was excruciating. Him talking about compilation and compilation targets was similarly painful. One of the versions of my first reply to you read: "I've been hurt in enough ways and enough times [by people behaving like that] to develop a little bit of aggressiveness towards them."
In all honesty, the point about how compilers work was just an excuse. I suppose what I really wanted to do was to tell BinaryIdiot how wrong he is about some things, and how irritating it is for me personally (especially today!) to see him talking about programming languages, compilers, and whatnot without first investing any time on research.
Well, it's still wrong and I should have just ignored the whole thread.