ecma262 VS telegraf

These aren't valid JavaScript (@@iterator would throw an error). They are actually internal Symbols used in JavaScript. They are used to implement features like iteration, instanceOf, and such internally. They actually might get removed or changed

Note that in previous editions, the ECMAScript® Language Specification used the term "lexical environment" before it decided to rename it to "Environment Record" so you might encounter this term in other definitions and tutorials.

For a new specification to be written, you need two things, a_ technical committee_, and a standard. The standard specification for JavaScript is called ECMA-262, and the technical committee is Technical Committee-39(TC39).

4. Proposed something else [ https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax ]

While apple is against Syntactic tail calls, they’re mainly just opposed to versions of it that would remove/unrequire the tail-call optimisation they already do: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/535

For the version of it that is backwards compatible, they wouldn’t need to do anything other than recognise it as valid syntax. Their main concern is that it "could add confusion with very little benefit."

The spec for STC has a critique of PTC:

- performance

- developer tools

- Error.stack

- cross-realm tail calls

- developer intent

See: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax#issues-with-ptc

Apple's 2016 response as to why they won't implement STC is here: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/535

- STC is part of the spec and will take too long to change.

- Now that they've implemented support for PTC, they don't want to regress web pages that rely on it.

- They don't want to discourage vendors from implementing PTC by agreeing to STC.

- They don't want to introduce confusion.

Some of these arguments about confusion and delays seem wrong hindsight, since on every point things would have been better if they'd just agreed to the compromise of STC.

- It would have been part of the spec years ago

- STC would have had a clear way for web pages to know when tail calls could be relied on (and PTC would have been optional)

- Other vendors didn't implement PTC in any case, despite no agreement on STC

- There's even more confusion as things are now

Simply use telegraf : https://telegraf.js.org/

this is pretty simple , you can create a bot yourself which simply listens for every message checks length and if exceeded deletes the message (bot must be added as admin ingroup and shows have read permission in bot settings) , I would suggest you to use https://github.com/telegraf/telegraf for the code,

In this project we will use the Telegraf library to create the bot. To install it, you can use the npm install command.

Changed the main library for working with telegram from https://telegraf.js.org to https://grammy.dev, updated the source code for better work with typings

Of course, it's good to write API requests yourself. It reduces the dependency on third-party libraries and allows you to control the behavior of the code more. But when there are more such methods than twenty, it already increases the size of the code. It becomes difficult to manage all the logic. This is where third-party libraries(frameworks) come to the rescue. After choosing a language, you can consider the options of different libraries from the list here, on the official Telegram page. For JavaScript I recommend using node-telegram-bot-api and telegraf. For Python you can take pyTelegramBotAPI and aiogram(highly recommended).

It’s an expressive type system, but ime it allows developers to go crazy on type interdependencies and general entanglement, so you can’t just go to the “header” and quickly figure out what your method or a return value really is, despite TS has structural typing.

E.g. look at this: https://github.com/telegraf/telegraf/blob/v4/src/telegram-ty...

The bot uses telegraf framework, which is an overlay for the original telegram api, which is a nightmare in code form.

Honestly I found their API one of the worst ones I've ever used. The documentation is lacking, and they have some unintuitive quirks like posting messages with http GET requests and randomly concatenating strings in params (botNAMEOFBOT anyone?).

I didn't enjoy using it without a third party library [1].

Sending a single message is easy, but using the rest of telegram's features is "meh" when using pure API calls.

If you want to see a well designed API, you should take a look at FTX or Stripe. I love those two :)

[1] https://telegraf.js.org

Today the most popular ways to build telegram chat bots in node js are Telegraf and Node-Telegram-Bot-Api. The second is more popular by weekly downloads(250.000), but in this post I don't want to equalize them by stats. I want to talk about my experience with them, in which cases I used them and show you really nice guide, especially for Telegraf, cause they haven't readable docs for newbies or people who don't use typescript.