It seems every article about LaTeX is a rallying call for Typst fans to inject their opinion of how amazing Typst is into a largely unrelated discussion, instead of reading and commenting on the actual article.
This is a repo for a new thing that is not identical to LaTeX, but intended as an improvement upon it. Typst seems apropos to bring up in related conversation.
If the parent compared the approach between typst and ExactTeX sure. The two probably should be compared.
"I like typst" doesn't quite seem to fit the substance I'd expect of a comment.
I agree that Typst is nicer to write. The difference is simply in the approach. Typst replaces LaTeX and expects you to migrate, while ExactTeX is a strict superset. You can rename a `.tex` file to `.xtex`, keep the exact same output, and add checks only where you need them. It is meant for the existing papers, templates, and journal classes that are not going away. Typst works well if you can leave LaTeX behind. ExactTeX is for cases where you cannot or do not want to.