Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Oct 2012 22:55 UTC
Permalink for comment 537222
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-29
... something smells like NIH here.
PS. I know they market it as statically typed, but it is in reality optionally typed, just like Dart. At least Google is admitting that, whereas MS is all about marketing ... again.
They solve the same problem in different ways. Typescript is closer to ECMAScript6 and a superset of JavaScript.
Also: The correct term is statically weak typed language. There are holes in the type system, but there are compile time guarantees if you stay within the sandbox.
So technically, yes, sorry, the creator of C# knows his terminology.