Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Oct 2012 22:55 UTC
General Development "Everyone seems to have a replacement for JavaScript - Google even has two. Now Microsoft has revealed that Anders Hejlsberg has been working on a replacement and it has released a preview of TypeScript. TypeScript is open source - Apache 2.0 license - and a superset of JavaScript. As you would expect from a Hejlsberg language it incorporates type checking, interfaces and lots of syntactic sugar."
Thread beginning with comment 537223
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

No, MS admits that JavaScript for server site is not an easy task to maintain, Dart is a different languaje from javascript, TypeScript is a superset of javascript (just like c++ is a superset of c), with means, that Javascript is 100% compatible with TypeScript, and adds static typing and many features javascript doesn't have. Besides TypeScripts compiles everything to JavaScript, just like CoffeScript does.

I like the solution, because it comes with the Apache license and is a very well thought.

I'd like for once that these haters read the documentation and statements before making such ignorant comments.

Reply Parent Score: 3

some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

TypeScript is a superset of javascript (just like c++ is a superset of c), with means, that Javascript is 100% compatible with TypeScript

Except C++ is not a strict superset of C, which means that C is not 100% compatible with C++. I.e. there are C programs which either are not C++ programs, or have a different meaning in C++.
I hope TypeScript does a better job at being a superset. But then, if you're 100% compatible with JS you get all the crazy stuff like this: https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat

Reply Parent Score: 3

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

In many cases the C's weak type system does implicit conversion, while C++ requires an explicit cast due to a stronger type system.

The ?: has a different priority order due to grammar issues.

Finally, after C89 and C++98 each standard group went its own way.

Reply Parent Score: 2

bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

<p>Does anybody know how this looks as far as security? And please no "Its from M$ so its worthless" as I really want to know. the biggest complaint I've had about JavaScript is that frankly its a security nightmare, you block JavaScript and malware drops right off the map.</p>

So I honestly don't care if it comes from MSFT, Google, or Toys R Us, if it helps to get rid of the security nightmare that is modern JavaScript I'm ALL for it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

butters Member since:
2005-07-08

The security issues have more to do with the DOM and other scriptable client resources. It's up to these interfaces to ensure that they do not expose unsafe operations. JavaScript simply allows applications to use the provided interfaces. In the scheme of things, Flash and Java plugins have been at least as problematic for web client security.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Besides TypeScripts compiles everything to JavaScript, just like CoffeScript does.


What are the benefits/drawbacks of TypeScript over CoffeeScript then? I agree TypeScript and CoffeeScript are much closer to each other than either are to Dart.

Reply Parent Score: 2

butters Member since:
2005-07-08

CoffeeScript is syntactic sugar for JavaScript. TypeScript is optional static type checking for JavaScript. Dart is optional static type checking plus various incompatible semantic cleanups and a standard module system for JavaScript.

TypeScript is definitely closer to Dart than CoffeeScript, but it doesn't go so far as to break JavaScript compatibility like Dart does. CoffeeScript-like syntactic sugar could be implemented as a pre-compiler for either language. LawnDart, if you will.

Reply Parent Score: 2