Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by gabrielsroka | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

gabrielsroka·

That's TS, not JS.

View on HN

One line of TS, then two lines of JS (with a type annotation in one of them)

It’s not even 2 lines:

1. Type definition 2. Chain definition 3. Enqueue definition

Line 1 is fully erased when transpiling, leaving two lines of JavaScript.

But you still had to write it and it's required to get the result, so I don't see any rational for not counting it.

Transpilation does not change the fact that the input is these 3 lines of code in 2 different languages.

Right, and only two of those lines are JavaScript. The type definition is not required to get the result.

For now.

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations

I noticed the same thing when I saw the code. Is it honest for TFA to title it as "2-lines of Javascript" in this case?

I came here to make the same comment.

I wonder why are you downvoted for being as factual and neutral as it is technically possible.

I think because a reader who doesn't want to use TypeScript can trivially remove the type annotations, so they're not actually a barrier to using this code in JavaScript. Some people might also be suspicious that the reason to bring this up is to imply hostility to JavaScript tooling that requires a build step, since it's become popular to hate on this.

So as a community of developers we're totally okay calling TypeScript "JavaScript" because ... mentioning that hard cold fact is a sign of hostility towards TS? Ok. Got it.

Oh, come on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com