Comment by Neil Douglas on "Yes, You Should Use TypeScript"

No, you do not need Typescript. What you need, is a dictionary, that would enlighten you that the definition of "need" is "require (something) because it is essential or very important rather than just desirable.". You need oxygen to live. You don't need TypeScript to live a successful good life. Explicit typing is not necessary nor essential. C, Ruby, Perl, PHP - even PHP - live pretty well without explicit typing. Go tell Facebook that they need strong typing in their PHP, otherwise they won't be happy nor successful, they will make mistakes, and will suffer through all 9 circles of hell. Oh poor Facebook engineers. Yuck. Amazing how hard it is for some people to accept that their mantra might not be the One Universal Truth. Just deal with it. That's the only thing you really need to do in this case.

Thanks for your comment, Neil.

I feel like I presented a fair argument for why someone should use TypeScript in 2023.

Do you have an argument for why someone should pick JavaScript instead?

I only used the word "need" once in the summary, and I may edit that out because I don't want to be dogmatic about it. This has just been my experience.

Alex Kates my quarrel is not about typescript itself, rather about the way this information is being served. "You should do this, because alternatives suck! No, you should do that, because it's better, it's shinier, and it's CPU is 1.4% faster! You absolutely need this new car with automatic parking because you suck at parking, people scratch all the time when they park their cars, don't be like them, buy this new toy with auto parking, don't be like all those fools!". The whole article is one huge marketing preach, borderline religious. And there are very few things is this world that are worse that religious approach to things and believes.

Telling people what they should do or use, what they need or needn't, is bad manners.

You should use the tool that you're the most happy, most comfortable with. Not the most productive, mind you. Leave the "productive" mantra to Silicon people, who don't mind burning out their life, their work, their passion early in the career. You should work with the tool you're enjoying. Even if I hit that nil error with ruby once a year, it still makes me much more happier that Java would. Yes, Types are nice. But that does not matter, if they don't make you enjoy your work. Nothing matters, if you're displeased, unhappy, or straight out hate what you do.

And if some people are happy with JS over TS - awesome! "It would be nice if you'd check out this thing called TypeScript, it may make your life better because this and that. It doesn't mean you should use it. It doesn't mean you need it. But it may make your life easier, so check it out!"

That's - what my point is about.

Neil Douglas

I respectfully disagree. This isn't a religious take, but a practical guide for choosing between JavaScript and TypeScript in 2023.

It's a persuasive article, not just personal preference.

While "use the tool that makes you happy" sounds good, it's not practical in a professional setting with real financial stakes.

Why not write an article sharing your own perspective?

Alex Kates A guide provides the reader with description, pros, and cons, and leaves the question of choice to the reader.

Marketing pitch convinces the reader that he needs The Thing or that the reader should use The Thing.

This article is trying to convince the reader that he should use The Thing, because using the Alternative is just so much worse. All while being on the entirely one-sided prejudiced approach.

Thus I leave up to the reader to decide if this article is a "guide", or just a blunt marketing pitch of the Thing that Author happened like more than the Alternative, to which Author, along with many others, takes approach with religious-like zealotry.

Search Hashnode