We really wanted it too. Jonathan Turner (I can't find his handle?) met with another team member (don't remember who)
-
-
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
-
not to touch on a sore spot, but I/we tried *many* times to get
@flowtype to work with@typescriptlang1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
I was told repeatedly that
@flowtype thought their way was better and preferred do their own thing1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
it's sad really. So much overlap in goals and user experience. Collab would have benefited everyone
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
I don't know, I wasn't there. But that's exactly how Babel felt when TS didn't want to merge the compile step
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jamiebuilds @thejameskyle and
yeah no doubt. not sure if that was best choice tbh. typechecking was our bread and butter
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
my perspective is that flow rejected type-syntax collab and TS rejected transpile collab 1/
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
both, imo, were bad decisions that have hurt the ecosystem long-term. Both aren't fatal 2/2
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
I don't think the compilation story is a dead-end anyway. Probably ways TS can integrate better in the future.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Glimmer uses a pipelined compilation approach, but it can lead to https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/pull/10189 … w/o attention
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.