Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript
Subject: Re: RFC: TypeScript Content
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 00:01:26 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <87h8v0583d.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <98e712be-f8fc-4f38-be66-2bbd9590fd2e@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0de08385fdb3c38cdf77fd13cd001ceb"; logging-data="31620"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19gYIrMus/Gc4z4lQ9pOLEjy8O/J2TcMxY="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tDFk6XRC6SAfe0Q2hDwAAYEJTzk= sha1:t0Rk0I6pZxZdj7sVk+155i+mFPk=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:34111

"Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> writes:

> Would the community agree that TypeScript can be considered on-topic
> for the group?

Given the quiet nature of the group, I would have no problem with that.

> Unlike CoffeeScript and friends, TypeScript is a STRICT superset of
> the current ECMAScript standard.

Since all of them result in comparison with the ECMAScript standard, I
would not have a problem with either of them.

The trouble would come with "what's wrong with this code?" or "what's
the proper way to do this in X" because both might suffer from a lack
of expertise here.

-- 
Ben.