Optional Strong Typing

Kris Kowal kris.kowal at cixar.com
Fri Aug 23 13:39:28 PDT 2013

On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:20 PM, J B <port25 at gmail.com> wrote:

> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2008-August/006837.html This
> is depressing.

J B,

You’re entitled to a dissenting opinion. However, this archives one of the
best moments for the evolution of the language. It was a commitment to
focus on deliberate, consistent, incremental change. We are realizing the
rewards for the Harmony agenda today with property descriptors (which
formalized and exposed an existing concept), new collections, and Proxies.
The cesura on namespaces have provided an opportunity for much much more
deliberately designed modules. Innovation has returned and the pace is
good, neither hasty nor stagnant.

That said, note that your sentiment has been graciously heard. What you are
asking for is well-represented by rigorous research going into TypeScript,
which is very closely aligned with work and proposals that came out of
these discussions. I believe it is fair to interpret Brendan’s last
sentiment, “This again puts unsound warning "types" outside of the
standards track for a while. But carry on with TypeScript etc. — TC39 is
tracking”, not as “no”, but as “not yet”.

Kris Kowal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130823/6d3002da/attachment.html>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list