Open utarwyn opened 1 year ago
Well, I both like and dislike TypeScript
TypeScript adds boilerplate that can quickly become cumbersome with added necessary build time Moreover, according to a well-knowned study (which would probably need an update), TypeScript was calculated as 4 times more energy consumming than JavaScript
Comparison to C
I usually prefered JSDoc where necessary. Nowadays, when IDEs don't do it natively, you should be able to also use TypeScript or the lighter flow to do typechecking and get autocompletion on regular JavaScript.
Both support "type inference" (which means that they detect the type of a variable / property based on the value it was initialized with)
TypeScript also supports part of JSDoc
Of course it's not as advanced as coding in TypeScript but energy impact and code complexity are lighter
See
The idea was to use TypeScript for the development of the plugin, but I agree that this will come with advantages and disavantages:
I understand your position but I think that the "ecological" cost of using TypeScript is not so bad, compared to the productivity boost.
ESLint exports a package
@types/eslint
with typings of the whole linter. This can simplify the writing of rules with autocompletion and typing verification.This idea has been proposed during the challenge, and I think it's a good idea to look into it. Maybe we should use it? What do you think of this?