sweet.js VS marshal.ts

I was ready to be excited from the title, but was utterly disappointed :(

IMO these aren’t macros in the Lisp-sense of the word (or Rust, or even C); yeah they run code at compile time, but that’s where the common ends.

Macros should be able to apply syntactic transformation on the code. Lisp is famous for allowing that by representing code as lists. Rust has a compiler-level API to give tokens and run arbitrary code, then spit new tokens out. C macros operate on the tokens level, so with enough magic you can transform code to the shape you want.

This… isn’t any of that.

A pretty good example (and something I’m still sad that it didn’t take off) of macros in JS is Sweet.js[0]. Babel macros[1] are a bit higher level, where macros require the input to already be a valid AST, but that’s also cool.

This… I’d say it’s more of a build-time code execution feature, not a macro feature.

[0]: https://www.sweetjs.org/

Macros I'd expect to be able to be able to expand at compile time to more code to reduce boilerplate, something like SweetJS.

But yes, I'll tone down my appreciation for writables in this sub, I'll confine my tangents to svelte. A kind of a shame I'd love to talk about using https://www.sweetjs.org/ to make the $ autosubscription work outside of svelte, and the like. But holy off-topic Batman!

Mozilla created SweetJS over a decade ago[0]. It added hygenic macros to JS and I'm sure everyone on the TC39 committee is familiar with it.

There's a lot to like about it, but macros in such a complicated language as JS are hard to get right. They'd also potentially lead to huge fracturing in the JS ecosystem with different factions writing their own, incompatible macro-based languages.

Look at JSX for an example. It's actually a subset of a real standard (E4X -- actually implemented in Firefox for a long time), but just one relatively small syntax addition has added complexity elsewhere.

For example, `const foo = (x:T) => x` is valid Typescript for a generic arrow function, but is an error if your file is using JSX.

I like the idea of macros, but I suspect they made the right call here.

[0] https://www.sweetjs.org/

Sweetjs is unfortunately dead [0] for like 5 years now.

It also doesn't have any typescript awareness which is required to build this kind of functionality - you want to have static type introspection available in macros so you can generate code based on provided types.

[0] https://github.com/sweet-js/sweet-core/graphs/contributors

None of these are supported natively by JavaScript. Macros and ifdefs you could get with your own build step using things like sweetjs or ifdef-loader for webpack. Enums are in a similar boat with TypeScript supporting enums out of the box. But there's also a (very early) proposal to add enums natively to JavaScript as well.

TS doesn’t have monadic do notation, which is something that I want very badly. This would be easy to add to JavaScript with Sweet.js macros, but there’s no equivalent tool for TypeScript. I expect that extending this to TypeScript would be very difficult.

> If forEach is not to be used

That source is simply incorrect. forEach is perfectly fine to use as long as you realize what is happening. It iterates an array where each thing is a function that returns a promise. Of course the results aren't what they expect.

ES5 array additions suffer from being a little too early (though later stuff wouldn't exist otherwise, so...). They are designed to deal with holey arrays (arrays with indexes missing). This is extremely uncommon today, but was decently common once upon a time. They were also created before the iterator protocol.

The real fix is to design iterator versions that can handle things like async generator functions.

> it should be deprecated and removed from the language in a timely manner.

NOTHING can be removed from the language once added. Doing that would break all the older websites that depend on it (technically, a few minor breaks happened after they tested millions of sites and couldn't find anything that was adversely affected). At best, they can block older features from newer features. For example, using class syntax or a bunch of other ES6 language structures automatically makes your code shift into "use strict" mode.

I hope they introduce a "use strict 2" variant that strips away more of the undesirable features than the current "use strict" does.

> Since Javascript is based on C syntax, it should have the preprocessor that the birthplace of C saw it fit for that language not to be without.

That pre-processor was a source of untold nightmares. Direct injection leads to bugs. If someone is going that route, full-blown macros are the only answer. There is a full-blown macro system Mozilla created a few years ago, but it's not very popular.

https://www.sweetjs.org/

There also exist some C-style pre-processors for babel too, but they should be avoided because lisp's gensym is a critical feature that they and C both lack.

zod or yup gets you quite a bit of the way there in practice - when you would reach for a Typescript type, making it in zod instead is more verbose but gives that runtime layer.

But for those who actually want full-stack non-stripped runtime type reflection based on Typescript syntax alone... https://deepkit.io/ - https://deepkit.io/blog/introducing-deepkit-framework - is a really promising and cool project.

It patches the typescript compiler (which pointedly considers runtime type information out of scope) with its own type compiler that emits a bespoke bytecode that is executed in a bespoke VM to communicate runtime type information to both server and client as needed. https://docs.deepkit.io/english/runtime-types.html

And from that baseline, there are very cool things you can do like an ORM entirely based on type annotations https://docs.deepkit.io/english/database.html or strongly-typed RPCs https://docs.deepkit.io/english/rpc.html .

It's very much in the alpha stage, but it's really well thought out - there's a tremendous degree of care the developer is taking towards code cleanliness and developer experience. I'm torn between wishing this project to have a fully funded team and take the world by storm, vs. "letting them cook" so to speak and seeing the developer experience unfold organically. Either way, it's a breath of fresh air into the Typescript ecosystem!

Deepkit (listed in the article) is a fascinating project and really deserves to be more popular.

It also demonstrates that what is being asked for is actually practical.

https://deepkit.io/

Checkout deepkit One of the things it has is a really fast BSON parser, that is faster than the JSON one to my understanding. Interesting work with TS types too

Hello HN community! I’m one of the founders of Magma, a multiplayer art platform. You might recall our earlier post (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30869131), and today we’re sharing a significant update with our artist-focused, multiplayer AI assistant, a first in the realm of collaborative creative tools. Hope you’ll like it!

See how it works in this YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZESJfjwxLjk. For in-depth understanding, here’s our documentation (https://help.magma.com/en/articles/6711598-beta-ai-assistant) and our AI manifesto (https://magma.com/aimanifesto) which is a guiding document for us.

We're inviting you to get hands-on with this new feature. Join any of these canvases (up to 50 live contributors each): https://magm.ai/qnss, https://magm.ai/ei74, https://magm.ai/38mr, https://magm.ai/z1ti, https://magm.ai/zdub, https://magm.ai/ed93, https://magm.ai/1l84, https://magm.ai/xvu5, https://magm.ai/gd9j, https://magm.ai/pu6e. All of these canvases have extra feature flags enabled but if you’d like to go beyond them, feel free to join our beta community https://magm.ai/magma-beta-artspace-invite

Our artist-first approach is rooted in our belief that human creativity should remain the heart of artistry. With our AI handling routine tasks, artists can focus on true creativity. Importantly, our AI preserves artists' copyright as it provides a clear distinction between human-generated and AI-generated content.

Beyond just art, Magma is a powerful tool for game dev and animation, offering powerful design & review tools for all stages of the creative process. Our Slack/GDrive-like workspaces (we call them Artspaces) expose API and even shell tools. One can even render any artwork in the terminal. :)

Technically speaking, our collaborative drawing engine is powered by Typescript, Node.JS, WebGL, with a hint of WebAssembly for hand-optimized performance that even Chromebooks can handle. The backend also leverages a high performance Typescript Deepkit Framework https://deepkit.io

Our AI assistant runs on a worker-based architecture akin to Gitlab CI workers, currently leveraging Stable Diffusion 2.1. Future developments will allow connecting your own AI worker, training custom models within Magma, and plugging in API keys from other AI backends.

Feedback, questions, thoughts? Let's discuss! Happy creating with a helping hand of AI!

P.S. A shout-out to the HN community, our last post here helped us connect with an amazing technical angel investor who has made significant contributions. Looking forward to more such productive connections!

Take a look at restfuncs then. Or deepkit or telefunc.

Both work out of the box very well with Deepkit. You can either construct your own types in runtime or mix TS types with runtime information. See for example https://github.com/deepkit/deepkit-framework/blob/master/packages/framework/src/crud.ts where this is done

Yes, you can directly use the interfaces and types as is with Deepkit (https://deepkit.io) and the library deepkit-openapi. You get also full route documentation if you use the deepkit/http router where you can use interfaces and type aliases plus validation thpes for route parameters (query parameters, body, etc). It still in alpha, but approaches soon beta.

https://deepkit.io/ may be of interest to you! It deeply patches the TS type compiler to make all types visible at runtime, enabling a lot of annotation-style workflows and dependency injection possible completely within the type annotation system: https://docs.deepkit.io/english/runtime-types.html

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31663298 - it's downright mindblowing that all this seems to be the work of primarily a single developer.

For a less intrusive solution, https://github.com/jquense/yup is a great library to reach for whenever you're defining the shape of a network-transmitted object and don't want to introduce compilation stages.