This is... good news, but I still cannot fathom using the default Typescript compiler for regular development. Seriously, leave the type-checking to your IDE and CICD chain, and switch to using tsx (<a href="https://www.npmjs.com/package/tsx" rel="nofollow">https://www.npmjs.com/package/tsx</a>) or swc (<a href="https://swc.rs/" rel="nofollow">https://swc.rs/</a>) and you will _immediately_ notice the difference in speed and productivity.
This is really impressive work, which can benefit other large JS tools.<p>I realise this is sort of a dead horse, but rewriting the Typescript checker in Rust would not be an impossible task for a team as well-resourced as Microsoft’s.<p>I know, because I rewrote a different 100KLOC typechecker myself in Rust (making a few small adjustments for a slightly different target language). It took me about a year.<p>It would speed up the TypeScript typechecker at least 3-5x, which would save a lot of programmer time (and also datacenter energy consumption).<p>There’s one obvious downside — it raises the bar for outside contributions — but given the expertise necessary to contribute usefully to a static analysis tool in the first place, and to contribute to TypeScript in particular, I’m not sure it’s a big additional impediment.
Extremely cool. It's crazy to think that the team built such an advanced tool for themselves, which very few other JS codebases can even benefit from. But the results speak for themselves, it was clearly worthwhile
Is there any effort to get browsers to support typescript? Transpiling is great, but all the tooling required by a typescript project, from transpiling to barreling, is becoming daunting.