> IMHO typescript could just cut loose from its javascript compatibility. Why not compile it to wasm instead of transpiling it to javascript?
My fantasy for the past year has been, if I could magically program anything, bringing a compiler and spec wholesale into the world out of the void, I would create a new language (call it WebScript as a placeholder) that
- featured an ML style type system, ADTs, a type syntax nearly indistinguishable from TypeScript
- whose actual core language essentially resembled Kotlin or "Go with exceptions"
- compiled to WASM or JS as a compatibility bridge
Nothing radical. Nothing revolutionary. Just these things would be an immediate plus.
But maybe AssemblyScript is a good enough step towards that.
I’m actually working on a language like this. I quite liked ReScript/ReasonML, but having to manually write binding to use TypeScript or JS code is a drag. I’m making a functional language that looks and feels like TS and lets you import TS directly. Mostly just stripping imperative statements, removing class declaration and adding pattern matching and better data constructors (never liked the discriminated unions). WASM as a target is a bit further off.
Go has exceptions: you can use `panic` to throw/catch just fine. The community will bring out the torch and pitchforks because it’s “not idiomatic” but if you’re programming solo or with other pragmatists don’t let it stop you.
My fantasy for the past year has been, if I could magically program anything, bringing a compiler and spec wholesale into the world out of the void, I would create a new language (call it WebScript as a placeholder) that
- featured an ML style type system, ADTs, a type syntax nearly indistinguishable from TypeScript
- whose actual core language essentially resembled Kotlin or "Go with exceptions"
- compiled to WASM or JS as a compatibility bridge
Nothing radical. Nothing revolutionary. Just these things would be an immediate plus.
But maybe AssemblyScript is a good enough step towards that.