Porting the TypeScript toolchain to Go made it 10 times faster:
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/typescript-native-...
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/typescript-native-...
https://www.theregister.com/devops/2026/09/18/microsoft-agen...
Anyone can claim anything is true!
"But why bother when you already have the speed up? And why didn't TypeScript deliver it in the first place?"
That's a question for them.
What makes node projects bearable, is that occasionally I have an excuse to write C++ Addons, or to fix something in one of those npm packages that is more native code than JS.
This stricter style js (asm.js) was the precursor to Webassembly; it still exists. You can also be very meticulous to craft monomorphic code through your project to get great performance.
Almost no one does this, cause it's harder, yet people still claim to know the limits of JS performance.
The AI Rust -> Typescript will provide the default structure V8 needs to run fast.
Asm.js was a political decision from Mozzilla that never accepted PNaCL, and was never as fast as Chrome's solution, hence why we have WebAssembly nowadays.
I rather have AI Rust -> Machine Code / WebAssembly.
Asm.js can be transformed into whatever PNaCL takes to get even faster - there is no limit. Especially if someone were to say, write new enchancements to asm.js to restrict it even further.
It will be hell write that in pure JS of course, but that's beyond the point. You can use all manner of (unnatural) signals/semantics to indicate, for example, in-depth type information about a language construct.
It is hard when dynamic language users do very dynamic things. My whole point is, you have to be doing some very, very dynamic things to get into the 10x plus range in most cases.
For the Python, Ruby, Perl family of purely interpreted languages no doubt 10-100x is normal. For quality, lower-level JS no way. In those cases, they are usually reaching into features inaccessible to a JS runtime. It could also be due to a VM performance bug/limitation. As a compiler/transpiler guy, I could connect those gaps if shown the code - in variety of "creative" ways. ;)
Why bother? It's better just to use a different language in the first place and get the performance for free.
Your argument is consistently "if only JavaScript was different then it would be faster".
That's wonderful but it isn't different. JavaScript is JavaScript. If you want performance you're better off with another language.
Adding another barrier in the name of performance is justified only if your project actually hits hard limits. It's annoying when I hear these claims of JS is slow, then look at the code in questions (if it's public).
The code always has immediate problems. In some sense, maybe it is better to just switch languages then to challenge these assumptions.
But it doesn't fit their needs. It's too slow.
Are you claiming that your own, separate programming language is faster than TypeScript, just like Go is faster than TypeScript? So in fact you agree with Anders?
The TS compiler has always been slow. There are/were several TS-in-Rust/Go compilers long before Anders announced and released the offical Go version. I've also been writing transpilers since before TS was a thing, the TS team could have made it work in JS.
But it's often easier to switch to a language that gives you that structure/performance for free. "Free" in that large companies have the budget to afford a bug-for-bug port/rewrite.
They could have rewritten the Typescript compiler in better Typescript. I just peeked at random files in last TS compiler branch before the port (v6.0.3). Simply put, I would not have written it that way. That style would surely hit it performance cliffs.
If anyone from the TS team is lurking, I can be paid a reasonable consulting fee to talk lol. No free work from me, I'm already too busy with my own language.
Or contract me to match (or maybe even exceed) the Go port.
But I suspect Anders and the TS team are plenty satisfied with their Go port. So maybe, it'll be more of an educational adventure.