> I see massive bizarre and difficult to grok type declarations that grow in excruciatingly byzantine complexity just to satisfy the compiler for non-trivial flexible function definitions.
Is this better or worse than no type definition? Whether or not a type is defined it is still consumed. I can totally understand that sometimes types can get a bit unwieldy, but those are the exact scenarios that save future-you from introducing a bug because you didn't know what a variable is (and is not). At the very least it may be an indicator of poor design/code smell when the above occurs.
I hear you on compilation/build process woes. That's the fairest criticism against TypeScript IMO (though it's a fairly weak argument as well).
Most of your other critiques aren't really levied against TypeScript, rather, your work environment (not that it makes working with TS any less painful!).
Is this better or worse than no type definition? Whether or not a type is defined it is still consumed. I can totally understand that sometimes types can get a bit unwieldy, but those are the exact scenarios that save future-you from introducing a bug because you didn't know what a variable is (and is not). At the very least it may be an indicator of poor design/code smell when the above occurs.
I hear you on compilation/build process woes. That's the fairest criticism against TypeScript IMO (though it's a fairly weak argument as well).
Most of your other critiques aren't really levied against TypeScript, rather, your work environment (not that it makes working with TS any less painful!).