TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

How we failed, then succeeded, at migrating to TypeScript

69 pointsby drobover 5 years ago

6 comments

AriaMinaeiover 5 years ago
I was looking at some of my old repos today. Enjoyed the nostalgia. Lots of CoffeeScript there. I had to switch to ES and then TypeScript because CoffeeScript was abandoned at the time and I was stretched over other projects to be able to help maintain it.<p>Reading my old code, I was surprised by how <i>clean</i> it looks. How easy it is to digest. There is a certain sense of calm when your brain doesn&#x27;t have to process all the visual clutter of a C-style syntax. I miss that.<p>I wish I didn&#x27;t have to choose between CoffeeScript and TypeScript.<p>TypeScript first and foremost is about type safety and tooling. Its architecture is largely syntax-agnostic. It operates on the AST, so the parser and code generator can be swapped for a different syntax.<p>CoffeeScript is all about syntax and does not (and should not) concern itself with most of the semantics.<p>They could theoretically be used together if TypeScript simply allowed custom parsers&#x2F;generators&#x2F;formatters to be plugged in.<p>This would work with ESLint and other JS tooling as well. I did a POC on that a few years ago [0].<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gkz&#x2F;LiveScript&#x2F;issues&#x2F;821#issuecomment-183640299" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gkz&#x2F;LiveScript&#x2F;issues&#x2F;821#issuecomment-18...</a>
评论 #21242211 未加载
评论 #21242116 未加载
评论 #21243851 未加载
评论 #21242271 未加载
评论 #21243572 未加载
评论 #21243973 未加载
davidjnelsonover 5 years ago
&gt; The most important realisation we had going into this renewed effort was that a successful migration has to be centered around people, not just tech.<p>Key insight. It’s always people first, code is a far distant second. Love Kent Beck’s series on this, so insightful <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@kentbeck_7670&#x2F;software-design-is-human-relationships-part-3-of-3-changers-changers-20eeac7846e0" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@kentbeck_7670&#x2F;software-design-is-human-r...</a><p>Great read, Heap team! Thanks for sharing :-D
评论 #21245339 未加载
评论 #21244362 未加载
seiesteover 5 years ago
Typescript seems to be approaching C++ levels of syntax and expressiveness. The main difference seems to be the existing tooling, tutorials, libraries, etc for node.js and others.<p>But if compiled languages like C++ or Go had as many dedicated libraries for webserver management as JavaScript, would there really be a benefit to using Typescript?
评论 #21243391 未加载
评论 #21242538 未加载
评论 #21242465 未加载
gingerlimeover 5 years ago
We’re now considering switching from coffeescript to ES6 (or maybe also Typescript). But coffeescript is seeing a bit of a revival, and I’m starting to wonder if we should stick with it?? Tooling seems a bit behind and also lacking things like tree shaking etc (??). But coffeescript is so clean and fun...<p>Any tips&#x2F;thoughts??
评论 #21242314 未加载
评论 #21242612 未加载
评论 #21242360 未加载
评论 #21242391 未加载
评论 #21244285 未加载
RangerScienceover 5 years ago
AFAIK, Ruby is the only language that people make other languages look like (CoffeeScript) and JS is the only language that people make look like other languages (CS, TS).<p>Are there others?<p>Edit: Well, I guess the JVM would be considered another?
评论 #21243834 未加载
Scarbuttover 5 years ago
<i>Yes, we were adding TypeScript code, but we were adding CoffeeScript at a faster rate</i><p>So the devs were able to iterate faster with CS than with TS?
评论 #21246223 未加载
评论 #21250457 未加载