←back to thread

Skeptical of rewriting JavaScript tools in "faster" languages

(nolanlawson.com)
160 points todsacerdoti | 1 comments | 20 Oct 24 21:25 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Jean-Papoulos ◴[21 Oct 24 06:37 UTC] No.41901260[source]▶
This guy is not competent to talk about what he's talking about.

>"JavaScript is, in my opinion, a working-class language. It’s very forgiving of types (this is one reason I’m not a huge TypeScript fan)."

Being "forgiving of types" is not a good thing. There's a reason most "type-less" languages have added type hints and the like (Python, Typescript, etc) and it's because the job of a programming language is to make it easier for me to tell the CPU what to do. Not having types is detrimental to that.

replies(9): >>41901279 #>>41901424 #>>41901541 #>>41901590 #>>41901822 #>>41901921 #>>41902028 #>>41902107 #>>41902656 #
1. gagaq ◴[21 Oct 24 08:30 UTC] No.41901921[source]▶
Please, preferring dynamic typing is not a sign of "incompetence". Stop this nonsense. Also, I won't question your competence because you called Python and JavaScript "type-less". The type-less languages (other than assembly) that were ever used were BCPL and B (predecessors of C).