proposal-type-annotations VS proposal-top-level-await

That proposal is not fully compatible with Typescript: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations?tab=readme...

They held a meeting a few months ago so it's alive but probably still years away.

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations/issues/184

I particularly like this thread in the TC39 types proposal. TypeScript IS a development trojan horse and locks you into the Microsoft Way of being a JS developer.

Edit: There is a proposal to extend JavaScript with type annotations, which would allow ("a reasonably large subset") of TypeScript to run directly in the browser. Yay!

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations

More importantly, TypeScript typically commits to build things into itself when the proposal in JavaScript reaches Stage 3. The pattern matching proposal in JavaScript is Stage 1, but depends on many other proposals as well that may or may not need to be at Stage 3 as well for it to work. This particular proposal is interested on pattern matching on JavaScript Objects and other primitives, just like Python does with it’s native primitives. These are also dynamic types which helps in some areas, but makes it harder than others. Additionally, the JavaScript type annotations proposal needs to possibly account for this. So it’s going to be awhile. Like many years.

this is exactly what I want from the _Types as Comments_ proposal[0] as I think it's the only way that types can feasibly become part of the language. It's hard to imagine how all of the concepts TS introduces via special syntax can be covered otherwise.

[0] https://tc39.es/proposal-type-annotations

Crossing my fingers that the proposal for allowing (browser-ignored) type annotations in javascript progresses: https://tc39.es/proposal-type-annotations/

Between that, HTTP2/3 and ES modules many of the downsides for building apps with no compile step are almost completely mitigated.

JSDoc can get you pretty far, but it can be clumsy sometimes. There’s a [TC39 proposal](https://github.com/tc39/proposal-type-annotations) to allow types to live in JS code and be treated as comments (similar with Python types today)

For more info about this feature, you can refer to the official proposal repo.

This one is Stage 4 (complete)

But browsers don't support top-level await yet. So we need to put it all inside as async function.

Note that ESM is not “backwards” compatible with CJS: a CJS module cannot require() an ES Module; it is possible to use a dynamic import (await import()), but this is likely not what consumers expect (and, unlike ESM, CJS does not support Top-Level Await).

top-level await feature for ES modules

That said, ES2022 does introduce a top-level await that works in the top level scope, but only in modules, not global scope. So if in a module this could work:

With the latest node version(s) (v14.8+), we should be able to rewrite the above code to something like this. proposal-top-level-await

Now a days, you'll likely mostly use async/await. The few cases where you'll need the Promise API (then()'s etc.) is when you're outside of an async function. With the new top-level await feature coming to modules, you wouldn't even need it outside of async functions in module code which will make its usage even less common.

The await is in top level. The top level await proposal is in stage 3. Currently, the browser support is also not good enough but should work in latest version of the google chrome browser.

There is a proposal for top-level await in JS. I'm guessing this would effectively kinda do the same thing? Or am I wrong there?