I am super excited for type-only imports.
Thank you for making this happen @atcb!
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Is there a chance to have Typescript WITHOUT Javascript? Typescript will never be a real language if it always falls back to js and follows its stupidity.
-
It’s been explored by microsoft research https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/static-typescript/ …, but it’ll never be a goal of the main project
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@drosenwasser Great work on all these super detailed changelogs
-
Thank you!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I’m not sure the arguments for using `private` convince me. It’d be cool to have it translated as the # version used by JavaScript instead of having both. Sure, it’s a breaking change but I guess it makes sense to force this correction.
-
This is not possible. An access to a field would need to have differing emits based on the type of the object (add the hash if it is a private field of the current class). Type-directed imports are an explicit non-goal of TS.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@buschtoens TOP LEVEL AWAIT!!!!! -
not gonna lie, I'm even more stoked about the type-only exports / imports.

- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Can we declare a hard private property as a constructor argument: `constructor(
#foo: string) {}` as we can do with private: `constructor(private foo: string) {}`? - 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.