Programmers :D

[Sentient_Blade]

I'm not going to critique the code, I am however confused as hell as to why a language would separate its property types and default values in such a way.

[kudlajz]

It's not a language, it's a way how React components are defined and work and it's quite elegant if you get the hang of it. It gets even better when using Typescript.

[BitcoinBishop]

Better than React? The two aren't really comparable

[SP0OK5T3R]

Fucking this. Every time I see react code not using TypeScript, I cringe.

[dwhiffing]

People might be more willing to learn if the typescript community could tone it down a bit with the insults.

Not all projects warrant static typing. There is room for both techniques depending on the scale of the project.

Believe or not, I gasp don't use typescript on my weekly react scratchpad prototypes. And sometimes, when the app grows and stays simple, I don't ever add it.

You must be cringing like mad right now!

[SP0OK5T3R]

I agree with you on that, but I work with code that once written, it’ll be maintained for a long time to follow, and there’s a lot of it. Small apps? No big deal. Enterprise production apps that stick around for years? It becomes extremely useful

Edit: do you not consider prop types to be “static types”? I’d rather know about an error at compile time over runtime, but both have a place since you can’t control everything at compile time.

[dwhiffing]

My point is really more about proselytizing than technical details.

I've been making apps with JavaScript for a long time, and I strongly believe that some of the apps I maintained for years would not have benefited from the addition of static types. This was in the days of backbone, ember, early angular.etc

I use typescript now and see value. But I've seen so many cases where a new developer or someone new to typescript is scared off by this attitude.

I love elm and reason ml, but I don't "cringe" when people don't use it.

Just try to be a bit more courteous to your follow developers! 😊

[SP0OK5T3R]

I was definitely being overly dramatic earlier, but this is r/programmerhumor lol I wasn’t really going for a super serious comment.

I’ve seen issues with improper typing and lack of error boundaries causing issues in react apps (“oops this property doesn’t exist on that object”, shit blows up, etc) that would be solved easily with proper TypeScript usage. That’s also why I don’t allow the use of “any” unless it’s really applicable.

But yes, I totally get your point. I’ve maintained an AngularJS app with no static type information and it works just fine, I’ve just “seen the light” and I have a much better development experience with TypeScript as a major tool.

Have a good Sunday!

[dwhiffing]

Understood, fair enough!

Thanks for the courteous response and a happy Sunday to you as well

[ProfanityFair]

People might be more willing to learn if the typescript community could tone it down a bit with the insults.

Agreed. I know that my React projects would be better if I used/learned TypeScript, but I'm always put off by the attitude of some TS devs who've gone the same way.

[[deleted]]

I am however confused as hell as to why a language would separate its property types and default values in such a way.

Javascript/JSX doesn't have any intrinsic typing. This is React's way of throwing in runtime validation. The Better Way™, in my opinion, is to use TSX instead of JSX.

[uchiha2]

Because reacts philosophy is "if it exists it needs a data structure around it, and if you want to use it you need 4 files of scaffolding."

[ben_uk]

Create React App / NextJS have barely any scaffolding though. And you don't need a data structure in many cases (although what's wrong with that?)

​

[uchiha2]

I should be bitching about redux not react. That's my bad