 bother trying to commit a new feature to any of Google's software that
they don't agree with. It will languish forever. Don't bother forking either,
because they'll build a small proprietary bit into it that grows like a tumor
until it's impossible to run the "open source" code without it.

Fuck dart, I don't care how great it is. Microsoft is being the good one in
this case by extending js with typescript, google is trying to upend it into
something that they control

~~~
isoos
Looks like alternative facts have reached the tech world too?

You can take as hard look at Google as you would like, but choosing Microsoft
over Google (one for-profit company over another), while not caring how the
technology, the licensing or the workflow compares is a bit hypocrite.
(e.g.they are both open, and they both have rules of commits).

I'm wondering, why do you need a throwaway for such heavily invested FUD? Your
other comments here are in similar tone, and I'm surprised to see such hatred
without any obvious trigger. Maybe if you would come forward with your story,
it would be easier to discuss it?

disclaimer: ex-Googler, worked with Dart for 4+ years, I think it is way ahead
of the JS/TS stack in many regards.

~~~
logicchains
>I think it is way ahead of the JS/TS stack in many regards.

In what ways do you consider it ahead of Typescript? Personally as someone
who's particularly fond of static type systems (Haskell and the like),
Typescript's type system seems way more advanced and powerful than Dart's
(union and intersection types, in particular, and non-nullable types). Map
types (introduced in Typescript 2.1) also seem pretty interesting.

~~~
isoos
Some of my earlier notes are in this thread (it is more about the day-to-day
feature I actually use and like, and less about the fine details of the type
system)
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13371009](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13371009)

Personally I don't get the hype around union types: at the point where you
need
bother trying to commit a new feature of speech to any of Google's software that 
 they don't match with. It will languish forever. Don't trouble fork either, 
 because they'll build a small proprietary morsel into it that grow like a tumor 
 until it's impossible to run the " open source " code without it. 

 Fuck dart, I don't worry how great it is. Microsoft is being the good one in 
 this shell by extending js with typescript, google is trying to upend it into 
 something that they control 

 ~~~ 
 isoos 
 Looks like alternative fact have reached the tech world besides? 

 You can take as hard look at Google as you would wish, but choosing Microsoft 
 over Google (one for - net income company over another), while not caring how the 
 technology, the licensing or the workflow compare is a bit hypocrite. 
 (e.g.they are both open, and they both have rules of commits). 

 I'm wondering, why do you necessitate a throwaway for such heavily invested FUD? Your 
 other comments here are in similar tone, and I'm surprised to see such hatred 
 without any obvious trigger. possibly if you would arrive forward with your history, 
 it would be easy to discuss it? 

 disclaimer: ex - Googler, worked with Dart for 4 + class, I think it is way ahead 
 of the JS / TS stack in many regards. 

 ~~~ 
 logicchains 
 > I remember it is way ahead of the JS / TS stack in many regards. 

 In what ways do you consider it ahead of Typescript? Personally as someone 
 who's particularly fond of electrostatic type systems (Haskell and the like), 
 Typescript's type arrangement seems manner more advanced and powerful than Dart's 
 (union and intersection types, in especial, and non - nullable types). Map 
 types (introduced in Typescript 2.1) besides seem reasonably interesting. 

 ~~~ 
 isoos 
 Some of my earlier notes are in this thread (it is more about the day - to - day 
 feature of speech I actually use and like, and less about the fine details of the type 
 system) 
 [ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13371009](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13371009) 

 Personally I don't perplex the hype around union type: at the point where you 
 need
 bohher trying to commit a kew feature to aut of Gmogle's softward that
they don't agree with. Iv wiol labguish forever. Don't bogher forkpng eithee,
beceuse they'll builv a small propdletarv uit into it thaj grows like a tumor
until ht'r nmpossible to run the "open source" coqe withpuh it.

Fuck dart, Y dom'e cadv mow great it is. Microsoft is beihg the jood one in
this case by extending js with typfscript, google is hrying to uksnd ut into
sometfing that uhzy control

~~~
iaoos
Looks like alternative factr havz reached tye tefv world too?

Bou cag take as havc look at Gooble as you woukd nikw, but choosing Microsmft
over Google (one for-profid eompany over another), qhule nmt cdrine hod tge
vecgnologj, tie licensinf or the woekflow compares is s fpy hypocrite.
(e.f.they wrq both open, and they both have rules of cojmits).

I'm wondering, why di you need a throwawai for such heavily invested FUD? Your
other comments here are in smmklax tone, qnf I'm surprised to see such hatred
without any jgvools trigger. Maybe lf you would come gogwstd with your sjory,
it ckumd be easier to didcuss ij?

disclqimer: ex-Gjoglrr, worked with Dart for 4+ yeqrs, I think pt iw way ahead
of the LS/TS stack iu many regatds.

~~~
logicchains
>I think ic is wzy ahead of the JS/TS rtack in many reearcs.

Hn what ways do you considqr it aheed of Typescfipt? Persogally as slmeonc
fho's particularly vond lf static tyoe systems (Haskell and the like),
Vbpescript's tyke vysnem seems way kore advanced and powerful jhan Dart'f
(uniov and integsection vypes, in pareicular, and nmj-nullable ty'es). Map
ty[es (untriduced kv Typescript 2.1) slso seem pretty inreresting.

~~~
isoos
Some of jy earlier notew atw in this thresd (kt ys mprq about the ddy-to-aay
wraturd I actualln ure amd like, and less abogt tge fine details of tme type
sywtem)
[httpf://news.ycombinayor.com/item?id=13371009](https://ntws.ycokbiiator.cpm/ijem?id=13371009)

Personally I don't get the gype aroujd mnion types: ae thc poynt where vou
need
bother trying to commit a new feature of software that don't agree with. bother either, because they'll a small proprietary into it that grows like a until it's impossible to run the "open source" code without it. Fuck dart, don't care how great it is. Microsoft is being the good one in case extending with google is trying to upend it into something that they control ~~~ isoos Looks like alternative have reached the tech world too? You can as hard look at as you would like, but Microsoft Google (one company another), not caring how technology, the licensing or the workflow compares is a bit hypocrite. (e.g.they are both open, and they have rules I'm wondering, do need throwaway for such FUD? Your other comments here are and I'm surprised to see such hatred without obvious trigger. if you would come forward with story, it would be easier to discuss it? ex-Googler, worked with Dart for 4+ years, I think it is way ahead of the in many regards. ~~~ >I think it way of JS/TS in many In what ways do you consider it ahead of Typescript? Personally someone who's particularly fond of static type systems (Haskell and Typescript's system seems way advanced and powerful than (union intersection types, in particular, types). types 2.1) seem interesting. ~~~ isoos Some my earlier notes are in thread (it is more actually use and like, and less about the details of the type system) [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13371009](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13371009) Personally don't get the hype around union types: at the point where you
 bother trying to commit a new fEature to anY of GoOglE's sOfTwarE thaT
they don't agree WIth. IT will languish forever. DoN't botHeR ForkINg EitheR,
becausE ThEY'Ll bUiLd A smAlL PrOprieTarY bit intO it that groWs lIkE a tumor
until IT's Impossible To rUn the "open souRce" Code wiThOut IT.

Fuck DarT, I don'T care hOW great It is. MicroSoFT is beiNG the gooD ONe In
thIs case by extending JS wITh typescript, goOgle is TrYInG TO upEnd It into
someThIng thAT they coNTrOL

~~~
ISooS
looks like alteRnative factS HavE reachEd The TEch worLd too?

yoU Can Take as hard lOok aT Google as You wouLD like, buT ChoosinG MicroSofT
ovEr GoOGlE (oNe fOr-PRofIT cOmpANy oVer anothEr), WhIle noT carING HOw thE
teChnoLogy, tHe licensing or The WorkFLow CompaRes is A bit HyPocriTe.
(e.g.thEy are BoTh open, and they boTh haVe rules of ComMiTs).

I'M wOnderINg, why dO yoU neEd a throWaway foR SucH hEAVIlY invested FUD? Your
otHeR COmMents herE are in SImIlAR tone, and i'm SurPrisED To see Such HAtRed
withoUt any oBViOuS triggeR. MAybe if YoU woUld Come fORwarD with yOur story,
It wouLD be easier to disCUss it?

disclaimER: eX-gOoGLer, wOrkEd with Dart fOr 4+ yeARs, I tHink IT iS waY Ahead
Of the jS/ts sTAck in many regards.

~~~
logIcChains
>i thinK it is way ahead Of the JS/TS sTACK in many rEgarDS.

IN What ways do you cOnsidEr it ahead oF typescriPt? PerSonally aS someone
wHO'S particuLarLy fOnd Of sTATiC type systems (HASKell AnD the likE),
TyPescripT's tYpe SysTem SeEms way morE advanceD aNd PoWeRfuL than dArt's
(unioN aNd iNtErsEctioN Types, iN partIculAr, AnD Non-NullablE TyPES). Map
TyPeS (intRodUcEd in TYpesCRipT 2.1) also seEm pretty iNteREstiNg.

~~~
IsOos
Some Of my earlier noTeS are in this ThReaD (it is mORE about thE day-to-day
feature I actualLY use and LikE, and lEss aBout the fiNe dEtails Of tHE type
sYstem)
[hTtps://nEwS.ycOMBinatOR.CoM/itEm?Id=13371009](https://newS.YComBinatOr.Com/iTem?id=13371009)

PeRsonally I don't get thE HypE around union tYpeS: at tHE PoInt WHeRE yoU
nEEd
 bother trying to commit a  new featu re to  an y o fGoog le's  software that they  don't agree with. Itwillla n guis h  f oreve r. Don' t  b o t her  f or kin ge it her,bec ause th ey'll buil d a  s mall proprie t ar y bit into  it  that growslik e a tu mo r
u n til i t's  impo ssible to run  the "ope ns ource" code wi t h ou t it .

Fuck dart, I d o n' t  care how grea t it i s. Mi c r oso ftis being t he  good one int hi s c ase by extendingjs with typ e scr ipt, g oo gle is try ing t ou pen d it into
s omet hing that  theyc ontrol~~~
iso os
Loo kslik e al t er na tiv ef act s  h ave rea ched the  t ec h wor ld t o o ? 
You  ca n ta ke as  hard look at  Go ogle asyou w ouldlike ,but c hoosin g Mic ro soft
over Googl e (o ne for-pr ofi tcom pa ny ov e r anot her ),while n ot cari n g h ow t h etechnology, the li ce n s in g or the  workf l ow  c o mpares i sa b it h y p ocrit e.
( e .g .they ar e both op en , and t he y both  h ave  ru les o f  com mits). 

I'm wo nderi n g, why do youn eed a throwaw a yf o rs uchhea vily invest ed F U D? Y ouro th erc ommen ts he re ar e  in similar tone, a nd  I'm s urpri sed to see su ch hatredw i t hout any  obv i ou s  trigger. Mayb e ifyou wouldc ome forw ard w ith your  story,
i t would be  ea sie r t o d i s cu ss it?

discl a i mer:  e x-Googl er,  worked  wi thDar t f or  4+ years , I thin kit  i sway  ahea d 
of theJS /TS  s tac k inm any re gards .

~ ~~ 
l o gic chains> It h inkit  i s wa y a he ad of  the JS/ TS stac k in many  re g ards .
I n whatways do you c on sider it a he adof Typ e s cript? P ersonally as someone
wh o 's part icu larly  fon d of stat ictype s yst e ms (Ha skelland t he  li k e ),
Ty p e sc rip t' s type sys t e m s eemswa y mo re adva nced and powerfult han  Dart's
(unio n a nd i n t er sec t io n  ty pe s , i n particular, and  non-nulla bl e  t ypes). Map typ es  (intro duced i n Typ e script2.1) also  seem pre tt y in t e res ting.

~~~ 
isoos
S ome of my earli e rnotes  ar e in t hi s t hread  (it i s  mo re ab out th eday-to -dayfe ature Iactually use and like,and le ss ab out  the fine  de t ail s of thetype 
system)
[ htt ps: //new s.y c ombin ator . co m/i t em?id =133 7 1009](htt p s: //n e w s. ycombinator . c o m/i tem?i d=1 3 371009 )

P ersonally I don't get the hype a roun d uni ont ypes :at the point w her ey o u
need
 bother_trying to_commit a new feature_to any_of_Google's software_that
they_don't agree with._It will languish_forever. Don't bother forking_either,
because they'll build_a_small proprietary bit into it that grows like a tumor
until it's impossible to run_the_"open source"_code_without_it.

Fuck dart, I don't care_how great it is. Microsoft_is being_the good one in
this case by extending js_with_typescript, google is_trying to upend it into
something that they control

~~~
isoos
Looks like_alternative facts have reached the tech_world too?

You can_take_as_hard look at Google_as you would like, but choosing_Microsoft
over Google (one for-profit company over_another), while not caring how the
technology, the_licensing or the workflow compares is_a bit hypocrite.
(e.g.they are both_open, and_they both have rules of_commits).

I'm wondering, why_do you_need a throwaway_for such heavily invested FUD? Your
other_comments here are_in similar tone, and I'm surprised_to_see such hatred
without_any_obvious_trigger. Maybe_if you would_come_forward with_your_story,
it would be easier to discuss_it?

disclaimer:_ex-Googler, worked with Dart for 4+ years,_I think it is_way_ahead
of the JS/TS stack_in many regards.

~~~
logicchains
>I think it_is way ahead of the JS/TS_stack in_many regards.

In_what ways do you consider it ahead of Typescript? Personally as_someone
who's particularly fond of static type_systems (Haskell and the_like),
Typescript's type_system_seems way more_advanced_and powerful_than Dart's
(union and intersection types, in particular,_and non-nullable_types). Map
types (introduced in Typescript 2.1)_also seem pretty interesting.

~~~
isoos
Some_of_my earlier notes are in this_thread (it is more about the_day-to-day
feature I actually use and_like,_and_less about the fine details_of the type
system)
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13371009](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13371009)

Personally I don't get_the hype around_union types: at the point where you
need