undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrvz1y ago0 comments

So in order to get "Faster TypeScript" you have to port the existing "transpiler" in a complied language that delivers said faster performance.

This is an admission that these JavaScript based languages (including TypeScript) are just completely unsuitable for these performance and scalable situations, especially when the codebase scales.

As long as it is a compiled language with reasonable performance and with proper memory management situations, Go is the unsurprising choice, but the wise choice to solve this problem.

But this choice definitively shows (and as admitted by the TS team) how immature both JavaScript and TypeScript are in performance and scalability scenarios and should be absolutely avoided for building systems that need it. Especially in the backend.

Just keep it in the frontend.

0 comments

Cthulhu_1y ago

They're not getting "faster typescript", they're getting "a faster typescript transpiler / type checker"; subtle but important difference. The runtime of TS is Javascript engines, and most of "typescript transpilation" is pretty straightforward removal of type information.

Anyway, JS is not immature in performance per se, but in this particular use case, a native language is faster. But they had to solve the problem first before they could decide what language was best for it.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse