ts-error-translator VS proposal-type-annotations

TypeScript’s errors are generally not great. There’s a dude named Matt Pocock who wrote a VS code plugin to “translate” TS’s errors into more human readable English: https://github.com/mattpocock/ts-error-translator

A lot of the Typescript errors are very difficult to read yeah. They contain a ton of information and then the useful bit is way down at the bottom. Sometimes depending on your IDE it can be hard to even see the useful part. If you use VS Code Matt Pocock made an extension that can clean up a lot of that, especially for beginners: https://github.com/mattpocock/ts-error-translator

Have a look at https://ts-error-translator.vercel.app

TS Error Translator has been a big help for me in dealing with TS error messages

Hey there! I love this extension from Matt Pocock https://github.com/mattpocock/ts-error-translator and I'd like to know if there is any "getting started" guide or something to port this to neovim using Lua to write it. I'd like to make it compatible with lspconfig + tsserver if possible.

Something like this? https://github.com/mattpocock/ts-error-translator

Have you looked into using an error translator extension? This one has helped me: https://github.com/mattpocock/ts-error-translator

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)