What do you think of JSDoc? As someone who knows neither I find the idea of no required transpilation very appealing, while still getting the TS ecosystem tools.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

JSDoc is much more cumbersome than using TypeScript. That's it. It clutters the code in a way that TypeScript somehow avoids. TS types are smoothly integrated in the code itself, IMO. Not as much the case with JSDoc.

[–] biggeoff@sh.itjust.works 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Thanks! As a hardware guy it'll be a long time before I do anything with this information. Nice to hear the opinions of actual Devs.

[–] moseschrute@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I suspect most Lemmy users hating on JS haven’t done much professional JS work. Especially these days with TypeScript and all the modern conveniences.

I’m curious, what kinda hardware do you work on?

[–] biggeoff@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 hours ago

Digital hardware, mainly top-level design in verilog and associated checks using python/perl (sad)

Right now working on a GPU which is fun!

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Ah alright 🙂 My pleasure! Yeah I wouldn't even consider JSDoc if I had the choice of TypeScript. I even did some years of Advent Of Code in TypeScript. It's performant enough and simple to employ some kind of quasi functional programming style with it. I think it's great.

[–] moseschrute@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I think Rich Harris famously migrated Svelte from TypeScript to JSDoc, while still supporting TypeScript via JSDoc. I don’t use Svelte, so I have no idea how well this works in practice. However, Rick Harris seems smart to me, unlike other overly opinionated devs like DHH. I still wouldn’t use JSDoc over TS, but I guess if it works for your project, who cares. What matters is that we all remember the one true enemy, DHH

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

I would actually love to hear the rationale behind migrating from TypeScript to JSDoc. Mind boggling to me.

Especially nowadays when there is promising work towards very fast, Rust-based TypeScript tooling, which web devs are in love with.

So yah, very interesting.

But yeah, DHH 🖕🖕

[–] iglou@programming.dev 3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Why is transpilation unappealing to you?

[–] biggeoff@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago

Being honest, I'm an outsider looking in. Most likely these things are solved problems, but alternates are always interesting to hear insider opinions on.

Sounds like it's developer experience Vs required post processing in this case, which is a reasonable tradeoff to think about

[–] sip@programming.dev 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

i wish a more performing language would have this type system. the only other ones I know are Rust which is a bit strict and slow to dev on, and Haskell which is too much.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Fully agree.

I hear good things about OCaml? Anyone tried that?

[–] sip@programming.dev 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

I asked chatgpt for a few languages with a good typesystem and it suggested ocaml among other (scala, rust, haskell, f#)

Then asked for a 100 line ocaml REST API example with a popular framework and db lib.. and it looks mostly like Haskell.

edit: async is done with monads

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

If it looks mostly like Haskell but has better tooling, I'm in. I have yet to manage to successfully set up a Haskell environment on my own PC. 😅 I am obviously missing something.

[–] sip@programming.dev 1 points 9 hours ago

I think ghcup is the simplest way

[–] sip@programming.dev 1 points 9 hours ago

I used it either through my distro's package or using stack install. there's also cabal install, but that doesn't install the compiler, at least not in 2017 when I played with it.