@Wats0ns@sh.itjust.works to Programmer Humor@programming.dev • 2 years agoInm looking at you Typescript devsh.itjust.worksimagemessage-square54fedilinkarrow-up1533arrow-down113
arrow-up1520arrow-down1imageInm looking at you Typescript devsh.itjust.works@Wats0ns@sh.itjust.works to Programmer Humor@programming.dev • 2 years agomessage-square54fedilink
minus-square@joel_anderson@lemmy.worldlinkfedilink2•2 years agoI mean that is the first step. ¯_(ツ)_/¯ The next step is to start defining the types more strictly than any.
minus-square@mark@programming.devlinkfedilink6•edit-22 years agoHmmm a more reasonable first step would be to just not even type anything until you’re ready. But TS makes it hard to iteratively type parts of your codebase over time. One could type using JSDoc syntax for these cases, though.
I mean that is the first step. ¯_(ツ)_/¯ The next step is to start defining the types more strictly than any.
Hmmm a more reasonable first step would be to just not even type anything until you’re ready. But TS makes it hard to iteratively type parts of your codebase over time. One could type using JSDoc syntax for these cases, though.
Yeah, true