Hacker News Reader

Comment by flavio81 | Hacker News Reader

The deeper problem is that JS is not strongly typed. Typescript gives you static type checks but the runtime is still weakly typed and will still do all sorts of weird type conversions.

View on HN

Theoretically, to what extend could the weird type conversions be prevented with the use of a strict linter? My intuition would be all, but I haven't thought much about it.

Once code reaches a certain complexity level (and mind you, the threshold is rather low), you'll need dynamic generation of code and data (or else, write 10x the amount of lines of code). For this to happen in a safe way, you really, really, do need the runtime to be strictly typed.

Are you making this claim about JavaScript or as a general statement? I've probably written less than 1000 lines of JS ever (and that only for hobby projects), but I would strongly disagree with this statement as applied to C++, Java, etc.

I'm sorry, I'm confused by the way you expressed that. The argument was you need strict typing for large projects. C++ and Java have strict typing. What exactly is the basis of your strong disagreement?

My comment is applied to any language with weak typing. Example: Javascript, PHP, and (sadly) C, particularly when using pointers to void. However, in C it's okay since there are big performance gains when you have full control of the memory.

Strong typing is a start but not enough for my taste. Static typing serves as documentation and compile time bug check, which is awesome to have. I'd like to have both, without the detour over typescript.

I don't think you're going to get strong types in standard JavaScript any time soon. Isn't TypeScript a very good compromise right now?

My take is that having dynamic typing plus strong typing is a (pretty) good compromise. And static typing plus weak typing, insufficient.

What languages would you put in these two categories?

Not all languages but here's a list:

dynamic typing, strong typing: python (for the most part), Scheme

dynamic typing, weak typing: Javascript, PHP

static typing, strong typing: Pascal, Ada, Java, C#

static typing, weak typing: C, Typescript, perhaps others

SPECIAL CASES:

strongly typed, dynamically typed, but with some compilers it can also be statically typed: Common Lisp

strongly typed, statically typed but can infer types: Haskell, ML family

strongly typed, can infer type with "auto" keyword: C++ (latest version)

non-typed: Machine language, assembler, perhaps Forth

What better alternative do you have to TypeScript right now though that you can use practically with existing libraries? Perfect is the enemy of good. TypeScript can capture more complex properties than C as well.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com