undefined | Better HN

0 pointscballard10y ago0 comments

I've tried JavaScript, and I decided I preferred type safety. This kind of thing:

> It lets you do stuff like redefine entire objects, properties or methods at runtime

Sounds horrifying to me, because, as in Ruby[1], library authors will decide that's a good idea. Typeclasses/protocols solve this problem perfectly, while maintaining type safety.

[1]: for some reason, this seems to be less of an issue in Python and Obj-C, even though it's totally doable?

0 comments

vardump10y ago

If type safety is what you miss, why not to use some transpiler like TypeScript?

http://www.typescriptlang.org/Tutorial

cballardOP10y ago

Then you're not writing JavaScript, which was OP's concern. TypeScript is fine (although Elm, Swift, and Haskell are more interesting, IMO).

vardump10y ago

TypeScript is very close to normal JavaScript. It's basically just JavaScript + type annotations which a compiler can check.

Compilation phase removes the annotations, after that point it is pure JavaScript.

How are Swift and Haskell relevant for client side web development?

Edit: Removed Elm

cies10y ago

Are you aware of GHCJS, Haskell-to-JS, compiler? In the new and rather popular "build/dependency manager"[1] for Haskell, named Stack, you can now quite easily install this compiler.

And I think it is only a matter of time till someone writes a Swift-to-JS compiler (Apple might already have it on it's radar).

[1]: I know it is not a "build/dependency manager", but I don't know how to call better in for sake of this discussion.

the_gipsy10y ago

Elm's only target is the browser/JS.

1 more reply

1ris10y ago

Look at purescript. In order to install this madness you need to install not less than 5 package managers, but you might like it.

purescript10y ago

The situation has improved since cabal install was required.

npm install -g pulp purescript

should be enough now.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

vardump10y ago

If type safety is what you miss, why not to use some transpiler like TypeScript?

http://www.typescriptlang.org/Tutorial

cballardOP10y ago

Then you're not writing JavaScript, which was OP's concern. TypeScript is fine (although Elm, Swift, and Haskell are more interesting, IMO).

vardump10y ago

TypeScript is very close to normal JavaScript. It's basically just JavaScript + type annotations which a compiler can check.

Compilation phase removes the annotations, after that point it is pure JavaScript.

How are Swift and Haskell relevant for client side web development?

Edit: Removed Elm

cies10y ago

Are you aware of GHCJS, Haskell-to-JS, compiler? In the new and rather popular "build/dependency manager"[1] for Haskell, named Stack, you can now quite easily install this compiler.

And I think it is only a matter of time till someone writes a Swift-to-JS compiler (Apple might already have it on it's radar).

[1]: I know it is not a "build/dependency manager", but I don't know how to call better in for sake of this discussion.

the_gipsy10y ago

Elm's only target is the browser/JS.

1 more reply

1ris10y ago

Look at purescript. In order to install this madness you need to install not less than 5 package managers, but you might like it.

purescript10y ago

The situation has improved since cabal install was required.

npm install -g pulp purescript

should be enough now.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse