search

microsoft / TypeScript

TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
https://www.typescriptlang.org
Apache License 2.0
101.04k stars 12.49k forks source link

TypeScript Roadmap: January - June 2019 #29288

Closed DanielRosenwasser closed 3 years ago

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

Roadmap Overview

This roadmap is meant to give our team and users clarity over our priorities over the next 6 months. It's meant more as a set of guidelines than as a strict set of tasks we are bound to finish. We may adjust over this period depending on changing needs and feedback from our users.

At a high-level, we're going to be focusing on the following 5 goals:

How do we plan to tackle this? While much of what we do ties into other domains, the how is broken down into the following sections which this roadmap will dive into:

Language design and innovation

TypeScript and the core type system

This is a continuous and iterative process. The goal of TypeScript's type system is to statically model patterns in JavaScript in a reasonable way while catching bugs and enforcing correctness. As more features are added to ECMAScript, and as we notice emerging patterns in the ecosystem, we have more work to do, and because the JavaScript world moves fast, so must we.

Something that may be surprising is "proving relationships between types". In a sense, this is our team generalizing patterns between type operators and encoding that in our type relationships. It's effectively having the compiler do algebra so that things "just work" when users use our type operators.

Back to top

JavaScript: TypeScript beyond TypeScript

TypeScript isn't just for TypeScript anymore. Our userbase now includes the JavaScript ecosystem as a whole, whether they are

Whoever these users are, we believe TypeScript can serve them in some way.

Back to top

Committee representation

We are involved in several different committees, including TC39 and the Node modules group. We try to provide representation as

Currently we're prioritizing forward compatibility with proposals/features that we've adopted early on, but we want to be involved in other above features both because we want to ensure that ECMAScript continues to grow in a way that makes developers' lives easier.

We have no plans to implement any proposals unless they hit stage 3 and we have high confidence in them.

Developer productivity tools and integration

Editor productivity

More details here

These "bread and butter" quick fixes and refactorings refer to a class of code modifications and fixes that are applicable to most users, and generally improve everyone's quality of life. This functionality is also useful for teaching users about language features and patterns, and can make working with TypeScript/JavaScript more approachable.

Whereas many of our quick fixes are "reactive" (i.e. they are created and triggered after a user has seen a definite error), "proactive" fixes are a way of taking the experience a step further where TypeScript can analyze code and can surface suggestions and code changes for improvements rather than to fix an error. As an example, as of TypeScript 3.2, we can detect implicit `any` types even outside of `noImplicitAny` and offer up a fix to infer an appropriate type.

Beyond that, we have more targeted workflows in mind. A lot of our recent feedback around TypeScript has been that dealing with declaration files is still the most painful part of the workflow - specifically around adding declarations when they don't exist on DefinitelyTyped, and fixing erroneous declaration files. We want to investigate whether there's a good workflow we can provide here.

Another targeted workflow is migration. We'll be investing in ways to ease migration to TypeScript and typed JavaScript as we believe there is still work to be done here to smooth out the process of adding types.

Back to top

Linting

In a survey we ran in VS Code a few months back, the most frequent theme we heard from users was that the linting experience left much to be desired. Since part of our team is dedicated to editing experiences in JavaScript, our editor team set out to add support for both TSLint and ESLint. However, we noticed that there were a few architectural issues with the way TSLint rules operate that impacted performance. Fixing TSLint to operate more efficiently would require a different API which would break existing rules (unless an interop API was built like what wotan provides).

Meanwhile, ESLint already has the more-performant architecture we're looking for from a linter. Additionally, different communities of users often have lint rules (e.g. rules for React Hooks or Vue) that are built for ESLint, but not TSLint.

Given this, our editor team will be focusing on leveraging ESLint rather than duplicating work. For scenarios that ESLint currently doesn't cover (e.g. semantic linting or program-wide linting), we'll be working on sending contributions to bring ESLint's TypeScript support to parity with TSLint. As an initial testbed of how this works in practice, we'll be switching the TypeScript repository over to using ESLint, and sending any new rules upstream.

Back to top

Speed, scalability, and stability

More details here

With composite projects, we introduced a "smarter" way to build co-located TypeScript projects for scenarios such as monorepos, "serverless" apps, etc. Part of the goal of composite projects was faster builds with seamless editor experience. We'll be continuing there, polishing the experience and making improvements like functionality for automatically swapping projects in and out to save memory.

In part because JavaScript users typically lack any sort of project configuration, we have seen some poor performance (especially for users in Visual Studio), and as such we'll be making this a near-term priority.

Over the last few versions of TypeScript, we've also seen some emit-time regressions. We're going to be investigating what happened to cause this, which includes setting up infrastructure to track the regression and hunting down the original problem.

Back to top

Command line experiences

We've consistently been asked for ways to automatically apply the sorts of code transformations that our quick fixes and refactorings use. Similarly, users have asked us for ways to trigger operations like "organize imports" or "format file" so that they can be used in pre-commit hooks. We want to investigate surfacing language service operations on the command line.

In the past, we've deferred to providing our users with APIs that they can consume. This has worked to some extent, encouraging users to create projects like tsfmt. In practice, we haven't seen that much of this.

In the meantime, we've seen projects like Prettier and jscodeshift sprout up, both with TypeScript support. These tools specialize specifically in their respective areas (formatting and code transformation), so we don't necessarily see ourselves as "competing" with these in any way; but if TypeScript drives the fundamental editing experience for TypeScript and JavaScript users, it feels like there's a gap to be filled between what happens in the editor and what happens during commits & CI, so we want to see what we can bring users here.

Education and UX

New handbook

More details here. We've long had a comprehension and perception problem from our handbook. If you look at our documentation today, union types come way too late in handbook under a section called "advanced types". It also [assumes too much about terminology](https://twitter.com/ryanflorence/status/1057093786428432384). Additionally, TypeScript is often perceived as a language that pushes JavaScript developers to write object-oriented code, and we suspect this is because our documentation and examples focused on newer ECMAScript features like classes (partially to demonstrate down-leveling features, and partially because we lacked union types early on). We're overdue for some changes. Over the next few months, we'll be working on a new version of handbook. Writing a general document for all users is difficult because the audience for TypeScript is broad, and one of the strengths (and weaknesses) of the current handbook is that it tries to serve everyone at once. We have several different groups of developers who have different expectations when learning TypeScript, and we need to adjust the level of exposure of different concepts. Given that, our goal is to organize the handbook into three different parts: 1. Tailored introductions (setup for the core handbook) 2. The core handbook (everyone reads this) 3. Reference pages (kind of like deep-dives/appendices) ![](https://i.imgur.com/WL1KUh9.png) Our idea here is to segment developers and create a custom introduction to TypeScript for different groups. These buckets would include * Complete novices * Background mainly in JS (or another dynamically-typed language) * Background mainly in statically-typed OO languages * Background mainly in statically-typed FP languages * Background with many different languages (i.e. the "veteran" developers) Once developers get past the intros, they are directed to the core handbook. The core handbook makes no assumptions about other languages, just a reasonably comfortable understanding of JavaScript. Users who read through the documentation of the handbook should never feel overwhelmed by details (the tone of the core handbook should be informal), and should be able to dive into most TypeScript codebases and feel comfortable contributing. Users who are looking for precise behavior and descriptions of TypeScript, on the other hand, will have a new section called "reference pages". These reference pages should have precise language and clear examples without impacting readability.

Back to top

Error and type display UX

More details here Error UX is a subtle but fundamental part of comprehending what the type system is doing. Over the past few years, TypeScript has accumulated what one could call "UX debt". As our type system has become more advanced, our UX hasn't kept up. To catch up, in the last 3 versions of TypeScript (3.0, 3.1, and 3.2) we worked on several different batches of error message improvements. ![](https://msdnshared.blob.core.windows.net/media/2018/07/3.0-error-messages-object-literals-vertical-2.png) The community response has been overwhelmingly positive and has validated the original feedback we received from talking directly to users. As we try to serve more inexperienced users, we need to guide them to solutions quickly with precise but approachable error UX. This includes prioritizing misleading error messages that users file, and thinking deeply about [what the heck is going wrong](https://twitter.com/michlbrmly/status/1066013071251070977) on the scarier messages. But it also opens up the opportunity for creative new ideas. For example, can we can have editors surface a more approachable experience, where users only see the full explanation of an error on demand.

Back to top

Playground and website

In addition to the handbook, we need to make adjustments to the website. Our playground will need an update, and will need an update to the examples.

Community investment

DefinitelyTyped

More details here

DefinitelyTyped is now such a core part of the JavaScript and TypeScript ecosystem. First and foremost, it's what actually lets TypeScript users interoperate smoothly with JavaScript libraries. But beyond that, it now powers the JavaScript editing experience across several different editors.

Today, DefinitelyTyped is the 10th most popular open source project on GitHub. That means there's a lot of traffic. When it comes to our team, we see our primary role not in authoring declaration files, but as building out the tools for others to do so. That includes our weekly PR rotations (where members of our team review external PRs to DefinitelyTyped) and DefinitelyTyped's surrounding infrastructure such as the types publisher, dtslint, and dt-mergebot.

As described in the productivity section of this document, we also have some ideas to make the offhand authoring process easier.

Back to top

External contributors

Back to top

Partner teams

We continue to elicit feedback from various partner teams, including library authors and organizations/individuals using TypeScript in interesting or broadly applicable ways. This gives us insight on various things we could improve. If you or your organization have any interesting feedback, we'd probably love to hear from you!

Back to top

API Consumers

Back to top

Outreach

We want to encourage members of our team to be involved with the community, and write and talk about things that they find interesting. This keeps us close to our users and makes the project itself more approachable.

Internal engineering

Team infrastructure

Everything that aids us in our day-to-day development and publishing processes around TypeScript is continuously valued. Making builds faster (e.g. converting our builds not to bootstrap themselves outside of CI), adding/migrating our lint rules, and adding new benchmarking infrastructure are things.

The idea here is really anything that improves

for development on the TypeScript project and any of our satellite projects.

Back to top

Organizational guidance

Because we have the expertise, and because we are involved with the JavaScript community, we're able to provide a level of guidance across Microsoft to give users better experiences all around. Additionally, when we hear about major build regressions on large codebases, our internal teams can provide us with their source code, allowing us to create minimal repros (which is not always the case with external closed-source codebases). This work usually benefits external users in some way, whether it's because a bug fix generalizes, because we've produced better APIs, or because we've been able to extract new guidance.

Back to top

j-oliveras commented 5 years ago

Last time I checked, we live on 2019.

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

@j-oliveras it's still January, give me a break. 😃

AbraaoAlves commented 5 years ago

I have a dream:

"In a world where we finally can maintain/generate types in a project with just .js files. In a world where Salsa is for everyone and typescript power can live inside of any JS project!"

Just finish this issue #7546 and make this dream come true!

ajafff commented 5 years ago

Proving relationships between types

Developer productivity tools and integration

Does this mean you are finally exposing type relationship APIs so that tools can leverage the whole power of the type system?

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

@ajafff I don't think the first part was meant to suggest that, but I think that still falls under the rolling basis of requests from API consumers. Part of the concern there is the level of abstraction we can provide for consumers given the sorts of underlying optimizations we might use in the type system.

Jessidhia commented 5 years ago

Wow, thanks for vindicating my migration to eslint + typescript-eslint-parser a few months ago :tada:

You probably don't have concrete plans to share yet, but I wonder whether you're planning on adopting typescript-estree + typescript-eslint-parser or if you're going to provide something else entirely.

Currently in my work projects I still have to run both linters; eslint + prettier for nearly everything, and tslint for semantic rules like no-floating-promises, no-unnecessary-type-assertion, strict-type-predicates and deprecation.

PS: I also use tslint's ordered-imports as eslint's similarly-named sort-imports and imports/sort do something else entirely, but that probably doesn't fall under the scope of your project

ianschmitz commented 5 years ago

Thanks for the roadmap @DanielRosenwasser. Very informative.

We've been using @babel/preset-typescript to provide TypeScript support for our users of create-react-app and it has worked beautifully so far. Do you foresee any additional investment in the Babel ecosystem from your team with regards to this preset or otherwise?

Jessidhia commented 5 years ago

Some more comments:

Also, it could be a good idea to rename "typescript playground" to something else; "typescript demo"? "typescript repl"? "typescript sandbox"? A google search for "ts playground" doesn't return what you were looking for (twitter reacts), at least as it relates to this project.

alecorsino commented 5 years ago

" Additionally, TypeScript is often perceived as a language that pushes JavaScript developers to write object-oriented code, and we suspect this is because our documentation and examples focused on newer ECMAScript features like classes "... The above is partially true but IMO is that there are lots of people coming from OOP background and other languages that enforce OOP and a lack of understanding JavaScript language. I remember before JS "classes" I would find myself explaining to other devs why you don't need the C word in JS and they would call me heretic an curse the language :) Another thing is I don't think that many people leverage the idea of Union types which is one of the most powerful thing that TS has but this idea is not well understood by OOP devs but by FPers mostly

kungfooman commented 5 years ago

IMO the biggest drawback of TypeScript compared to Unity/C# is the lack of operator overloading, which is used like in every method, when you are dealing with vectors, matrices and quaternions. Could that be added to the list for the next 6 months? It would really give TypeScript an edge for all the game developers.

Jessidhia commented 5 years ago

The above is partially true but IMO is that there are lots of people coming from OOP background and other languages that enforce OOP and a lack of understanding JavaScript language.

One problem I encountered a lot when I introduced modern JS in my codebase is people writing and exporting either singleton objects or classes that only have static members. This is due to people misunderstanding ES modules, and misunderstanding of ES modules is rampant in the JS/TS community.

I believe a contribution to it is how typescript implements star imports, and is self-perpetuating because of how many code samples and even @types packages (ab)use them for importing commonjs modules. Another unpopular "it's breaking but it's a good break" change I wish for, the --esModuleInterop behavior should be made true by default. Stop import { Component } from 'react'.

Jessidhia commented 5 years ago

@kungfooman That's a TC39 / ECMAScript problem, not TypeScript, because it's a runtime feature. See Goals 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8 of https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/wiki/TypeScript-Design-Goals#goals

uniqueiniquity commented 5 years ago

@Kovensky I've been working to enable semantic rules for ESLint through typescript-estree and typescript-eslint-parser. Once https://github.com/eslint/typescript-eslint-parser/pull/568 is in, we'll be able to merge the first few semantic rules to eslint-plugin-typescript and more in the future.

kungfooman commented 5 years ago

@Kovensky It just needs a little bit of AST rewriting, like vector_a * vector_b would emit the JavaScript code vector_a.mul(vector_b).

If thats already too much "breakage", it could be a tsc compiler option.

Once JavaScript finally supports operator overloading, TypeScript would already be prepared to make use of it.

Jessidhia commented 5 years ago

@uniqueiniquity hmm, you have to manually specify path to tsconfig.json in the eslint config 😢

Would be nice to be able to resolve it relative to the file being linted, or at least relative to the eslint config instead of relative to cwd.

j-f1 commented 5 years ago

hm interesting @kungfooman — with TS’s type system, you can know which variables have overloaded operators, although anys would wreak havoc.

sompylasar commented 5 years ago

Please reconsider index (brackets []) operator type safety: https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/issues/13778#issuecomment-406316164 — this operator is one of the core features of JavaScript and subsequently TypeScript but its usage is still not safe.

milesj commented 5 years ago

Didn't see it mentioned in the list but a rewrite of the JSX/TSX layer and all it's edge cases would be great. Having everything typed as JSX.Element is also quite annoying, when the props shape should be inferred and used. I believe this PR covers a bit of it: https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/issues/21699

eamodio commented 5 years ago

While probably largely outside the scope of TypeScript itself, I would love to see better webpack support (easy setup, fast recompiles, better sourcemap mapping, much better vscode problem matching support, etc)

octref commented 5 years ago

surfacing language service operations on the command line.

I feel surfacing the operations as API would be more worthwhile. For example, if I can get an easy-to-use API to get all unused variables in a codebase, get all usage of a specific library, etc, they would be immensely helpful for me to build other tools on top of it.

I doubt what people want is, say, running tsc --autofix-all-my-unused-variable-errors my-project on CLI / CI. An API that allows people to:

would be really nice.

On the other hand, let's say TS offers an API for finding all usages of a specific library. Now I can generate dependency graphs or even automate code-splitting. I think making "CLI tool" the end goal would only capture very limited use cases.

In the past, we've deferred to providing our users with APIs that they can consume. This has worked to some extent, encouraging users to create projects like tsfmt. In practice, we haven't seen that much of this.

That's likely due to lack of documentation and working samples. I'd love more projects similar to https://github.com/dsherret/ts-simple-ast and https://github.com/dsherret/ts-ast-viewer from TS team.

littlepoolshark commented 5 years ago

I am looking much forward to "Writing tailored intros for developers with different backgrounds"!

donaldpipowitch commented 5 years ago
  • Locally fork @types package

That sounds great. And it would be nice, if one could automatically create pull requests from those 😍

Similarly, users have asked us for ways to trigger operations like "organize imports" or "format file" so that they can be used in pre-commit hooks.

Oh, yes ❤️See you "remove unused vars"!

johnnyreilly commented 5 years ago

While probably largely outside the scope of TypeScript itself, I would love to see better webpack support (easy setup, fast recompiles, better sourcemap mapping, much better vscode problem matching support, etc)

@eamodio - speaking on behalf of ts-loader and fork-ts-checker-webpack-plugin I second this 😉

And also: PRs are always welcome!

remojansen commented 5 years ago

@DanielRosenwasser happy new year :tada: About the "New handbook" and "In-depth blog post content" I would be happy to try to contribute if you guys have a list of topics that you would like to cover.

j-f1 commented 5 years ago

I’d like to see an option to treat all TS files as TSX.

styfle commented 5 years ago

This is awesome, Great work!

In regard to "Enabling popular JS patterns in a type-safe way"...

I would like to draw some attention back to #2491. This is a popular pattern and logically, a const enum gets compiled to a number. Even after many duplicates tickets this is still not fixed.

const enum Filter {
    One,
    Two,
    Three,
}

const filters: { [key: Filter]: string } = {};

Try in Playground

Please consider re-opening #2491

j-oliveras commented 5 years ago

@styfle If I understand correctly what you want, you can already do it:

const enum Filter {
    One, // If you want that start with 1 assign it
    Two,
    Three,
}

const filters1: { [key in Filter]: string } = { 0: '', 1: '', 2: '' };
const filters2: { [key in Filter]: string } = { [Filter.One]: '', [Filter.Two]: '', [Filter.Three]: '' };
const filters3: { [key in Filter]?: string } = {} // All optionals.

Playground.

ericanderson commented 5 years ago

@DanielRosenwasser Can you email me: eanderson@CompanyThatMaintainsTslint?

Retsam commented 5 years ago

@kungfooman Typescript definitely shouldn't add operator overloading. As this roadmap says:

We have no plans to implement any proposals unless they hit stage 3 and we have high confidence in them.

As far as I can tell, operator overloading isn't even stage-0.

If you really want operator overloading in TS, you'd probably have more luck finding or writing a Babel plugin, and using a Babel 7 + Typescript setup to enable it in your projects.

uniqueiniquity commented 5 years ago

@Kovensky My original approach actually did resolve the tsconfig path more implicitly, but I got some early feedback that led me to take the manual specification approach. It's certainly something I'm open to lighting up in the future though, since it should be fairly easy to add.

agentcooper commented 5 years ago

@DanielRosenwasser I would be happy to donate the code from https://typescript-play.js.org/. Or help with improving yours as soon as you open source it.

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

@agentcooper we actually might take you up on that offer. ❤️

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

I’d like to see an option to treat all TS files as TSX.

@j-f1 Won't happen because of parsing ambiguity issues, which is why .tsx exists in the first place.

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

While probably largely outside the scope of TypeScript itself, I would love to see better webpack support (easy setup, fast recompiles, better sourcemap mapping, much better vscode problem matching support, etc)

@eamodio @johnnyreilly if you have something only TypeScript can do, or which all API consumers would benefit from, let us know!

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

is that mean..... dependent type? or algebra data type?

@Kingwl it's more like scaffolding out type relationships so things you intuitively think make sense just work. For example, keyof T being a subtype of keyof U when U is a subtype of T, and both are generic.

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

@Kovensky

What is "ETW support"; event tracing for windows?

Yes, we might have a way for users to give more detailed reports of regressions using ETW (which is especially helpful for Visual Studio users who experience regressions, but can be used by anyone on Windows). I don't have exact design details, but it'll be installable as a separate module.

This is one thing that probably falls under personal preference, but it'd be greatly appreciated if the new docs wouldn't introduce as as an "alternate syntax" to <assert> and never mentioned again, but as as the only syntax and the <assert> as a kind of "annex b" legacy feature.

Noted, and I have a strong preference for as as well.

This probably falls under DT governance instead of the TypeScript project itself, but I really want to completely rewrite @types/react in a breaking way (years of accumulated misfeatures and legacy baggage) and I don't know how I could do it without creating a python3 problem. I probably need some help here.

If you create an issue and include me, @weswigham, @RyanCavanaugh, and other interested authors in DefinitelyTyped, that might be a good first step, but I would urge caution here. That might end up being surprisingly disruptive.

Babel's typescript parser unfortunately hasn't kept up with new syntax features in tsc; it's still stuck in typescript 2.8 level support. I started a PR to add import() types support at least, but parsers are not my area of expertise...

We've been using @babel/preset-typescript to provide TypeScript support for our users of create-react-app and it has worked beautifully so far. Do you foresee any additional investment in the Babel ecosystem from your team with regards to this preset or otherwise?

@Kovensky @ianschmitz we've integrated Babel work into our Release Activities processes, so I guess it's implied. To my knowledge, import() types are the only TypeScript-specific feature from 2.9+ that's missing (see https://github.com/babel/babel/issues/7747 and other issues filed on Babel under area: TypeScript). Looks like https://github.com/babel/babel/pull/9302 is currently out for review though.

j-f1 commented 5 years ago

parsing ambiguity

That’s why I suggested an option — people who don’t need the ambiguous syntax can avoid having to name their files .tsx.

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

That’s why I suggested an option — people who don’t need the ambiguous syntax can avoid having to name their files .tsx.

Check out #26489 where this was discussed last.

trotyl commented 5 years ago

As far as I can tell, operator overloading isn't even stage-0.

@Retsam The operator overloading proposal is going to be advanced to stage-0 in Jan. 2019's TC39 meeting.

Although the conclusion is same, it's still far from stage-3.

Note: Advancing to stage-0 has no real requirement and always success.

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

All conversation around operator overloading should continue at #5407

yes I am aware that is a locked issue, we are not doing operator overloading

wintercounter commented 5 years ago

What I want to see is TypeScript to simply become a Babel plugin. Since v7 it understands TS syntax. I think this way TS would be able to fit much better in the whole ecosystem and the TS team can concentrate more on features than implementing EcmaScript transpilers which is done by Babel also anyway.

vjeux commented 5 years ago

This is an extremely well written roadmap, well done!

You mentioned prettier in your roadmap, as the co-creator of prettier and the one actively pushing for TypeScript support, let me know if I can do anything to help or chat about the space, would love to.

thunderkid commented 5 years ago

Be great to see a playground that had functionality like a Jupyter Notebook. To actually run code in the existing playground is pretty cumbersome by comparison.

j-f1 commented 5 years ago

functionality like a Jupyter Notebook

You could partner with Observable to add TS support.

jesstelford commented 5 years ago

Is there much of a push to bring features to editors other than VSCode?

Some of the mentioned things like exposing new APIs, and New CLI tools would help third parties, but it would be great to see other editors (eg; vim edit: or emacs!) get official support.

weswigham commented 5 years ago

Some of the mentioned things like exposing new APIs, and New CLI tools would help third parties, but it would be great to see other editors (eg; vim) get official support.

@sandersn is an avid emacs user 😄

jonrimmer commented 5 years ago

I'm very sad and disappointed that, despite wide community support and popular proposals, a better syntax for typing destructuring is not planned, for what seems like nebulous and speculative concerns, and instead we are getting half-baked answers like named parameter refactoring.

There is so much emphasis on making TypeScript a pleasant language to use in so many ways, I don't understand why such an ugly and frustrating language deficiency is allowed to persist when there is a good solution sitting in plain sight.

DanielRosenwasser commented 5 years ago

@jonrimmer that refactoring and that feature request are not at odds with each other. That refactoring is not an answer to easier typed object destructuring, and if a new syntax was adopted, then the refactoring itself could support both the proposed named as well as an anonymous version.

I don't understand why such an ugly and frustrating language deficiency is allowed to persist when there is a good solution sitting in plain sight.

Check our the original rationale.

Is there much of a push to bring features to editors other than VSCode?

@jesstelford we officially maintain TypeScript support for Visual Studio, Visual Studio Code, and our Sublime Text Plugin. Unfortunately while occasionally Nathan can send PRs to tide, we can't commit to taking care of all of these plugins.

On the other hand, we're more than happy to help support the authors of those plugins by answering API questions.

jonrimmer commented 5 years ago

@DanielRosenwasser They may not exactly be at odds, but it's half-baked in that it's based on automating an ugly practice—cluttering codebases with separate, single-use interfaces that only serve to define the types for a function's signature—that wouldn't be necessary if we had a better syntax.

And I have read that rationale. That's what I was referring to as nebulous and speculative.

It's hard to escape the impression that the original decision was taken based on a reflexive dislike for an unavoidably imperfect syntax, and the rationale was mostly come up with post hoc. And the team thereafter adopted a close-minded attitude that this issue was settled and we should all forget about it. Except I can't forget about it, because I'm reminded each and every time I have to write some ugly and long-winded function definition.

jesstelford commented 5 years ago

@DanielRosenwasser love the commitment to 3rd party support, thanks!