What about square screens?

inb4 chaotic neckpain

but I could see it being a good step forward for more meaningful features to be added in the future.

I think you are right. And that is unfortunate.

My bad, I’m not deep enough into our frontend stack to realize Hjeilsberg already did what he does best - ruining enums. (I guess he is not to blame for global imports in c#, so i can not add ‘questionable import module/namespace ideas’.)

And it seems like this proposal contains type declarations (in order to compensate for their enums), among other typescript specific things. So, guess it is option B, then.

That’s not a positive, though.

Depending on how it pans out, it’s either not useful enough. Who the hell doesn’t use namespaces or enums. Or - as

These constructs are not in the scope of this proposal, but could be added by separate TC39 proposals.

implies - a door opener to outsource TypeScripts problem unto other peoples and not to investing into improving WebAssembly. That’s just MS being lazy and making their problems other peoples problems.

I feel like this would be the ideal scenario: things working right out of the box without needing a compile step or additional tooling.

It’s just annotations. No proposed semantics of a type system which your browser could check on its own.

Now, you’re paying for the product, and you continue to be the product.

So this is what “neofeudalism” boils down to?

install minor cc update

compiler exploits undefined behavior as it always was technically allowed to

Checkmate, Cniles!

Perl is panel 1, except it’s missingno. doing the talking.

So that’s what inspired Vigil…

How compiler builders see peppa:

even number of nostrils

Missed opportunity.

This. And additionally, JavaScript perhaps has one unlikely advantage: Churn for the sake of following trends.

This. However, in our specific scenario dynamics were even slightly worse. In a first meeting said consultants apparently met some resistance but management decided to go through with it anyway. So in a later meeting, if I was the consultant, would I go and claim “Alright, I fucked up, got paid and got you gaslighted, but now we have to refactor to clean up our codebase with no immediate tangible benefit for your bosses” in front of everyone? Honestly, I don’t think so.

Indeed, and just as my old team fell for consultants, my new team also went ahead and let them add some overcomplex garbage into their codebases. And crap still keeps piling up. It’s just like it’s impossible for them to understand that from an average consultants perspective the only way to go forward is to keep adding complexity, wether they are aware of it or not.

All those unit test that the devs didn’t bother to test on other platforms.

Yeah, at some point my new team switched off null safety, because some consultants told them to.

Imagine using the menu key and always using the shortcut in the popup menu…