protobuf-ts-types is a tool that automatically generates TypeScript types from Protobuf schemas without requiring any code generation or compilation steps. It leverages the Protobuf runtime library to infer types directly, offering a simpler and faster workflow for TypeScript developers working with Protobuf. This eliminates the need for separate code generation tools and keeps the TypeScript types synchronized with the Protobuf schemas, reducing potential errors. The project aims to improve developer experience and efficiency when using Protobuf in TypeScript projects.
F# offers a compelling blend of functional and object-oriented programming, making it suitable for diverse tasks from scripting and data science to full-fledged applications. Its succinct syntax, strong type system, and emphasis on immutability enhance code clarity, maintainability, and correctness. Features like type inference, pattern matching, and computational expressions streamline development, enabling developers to write concise yet powerful code. While benefiting from the .NET ecosystem and interoperability with C#, F#'s distinct functional-first approach fosters a different, often more elegant, way of solving problems. This translates to improved developer productivity and more robust software.
Hacker News users discuss the merits of F#, often comparing it to other functional languages like OCaml, Haskell, and Clojure. Some commenters appreciate F#'s practicality and ease of use, especially within the .NET ecosystem, highlighting its strong typing and tooling. Others find its functional purity less strict than Haskell's, viewing it as both a benefit (pragmatism) and a drawback (potential for less elegant code). The discussion touches on F#'s suitability for specific domains like data science and web development, with some expressing enthusiasm while others note the prevalence of C# in those areas within the .NET world. Several comments lament the comparatively smaller community and ecosystem surrounding F#, despite acknowledging its technical strengths. The overall sentiment appears to be one of respect for F# but also a recognition of its niche status.
Mads Tofte's "Four Lectures on Standard ML" provides a concise introduction to the core concepts of SML. It covers the fundamental aspects of the language, including its type system with polymorphism and type inference, its support for functional programming with higher-order functions, and its module system for structuring large programs. The lectures emphasize clarity and practicality, demonstrating how these features contribute to writing reliable and reusable code. Examples illustrate key concepts like pattern matching, data structures, and abstract data types. The text aims to provide a solid foundation for further exploration of SML and its applications.
Hacker News users discuss Mads Tofte's "Four Lectures on Standard ML" with appreciation for its clarity and historical context. Several commenters highlight the document as an excellent introduction to ML and type inference, praising its conciseness and accessibility compared to more modern resources. Some note the significance of seeing the language presented shortly after its creation, offering a glimpse into its original design principles. The lack of dependent types is mentioned, with one commenter pointing out that adding them would significantly alter ML's straightforward type inference. Others discuss the influence of ML on later languages like Haskell and OCaml, and the enduring relevance of its core concepts. A few users reminisce about their experiences learning ML and using related tools like SML/NJ.
The Go blog post announces the deprecation of the go/types package's core types in favor of using standard Go types directly. This simplifies type checking and reflection by removing a separate type system representation, making code easier to understand and maintain. Instead of using types.Int, types.String, etc., developers should now use int, string, and other built-in types when working with the go/types package. This change improves the developer experience by streamlining interactions with types and aligning type checking more closely with the language itself. The blog post details how to migrate existing code to the new approach and emphasizes the benefits of this simplification for the Go ecosystem.
Hacker News commenters largely expressed relief and approval of Go's reversion from the proposed coretypes changes. Many felt the original proposal was overly complex and solved a problem most Go developers didn't have, while introducing potential performance issues and breaking changes. Some appreciated the experiment's insights into Go's type system, but ultimately agreed the added complexity wasn't worth the purported benefits. A few commenters lamented the wasted effort and questioned the decision-making process that led to the proposal in the first place, while others pointed out that exploring such ideas, even if ultimately abandoned, is a valuable part of language development. The prevailing sentiment was satisfaction with the return to the familiar and pragmatic approach that characterizes Go.
The blog post "Gleam, Coming from Erlang" explores the author's experience transitioning from Erlang to Gleam, a newer language built on the Erlang Virtual Machine (BEAM). It highlights Gleam's similarities to Erlang, such as its functional nature, immutability, and the benefits of the BEAM ecosystem like concurrency and fault tolerance. However, the author emphasizes key differences, primarily Gleam's static typing, more approachable syntax inspired by Rust and Elm, and its focus on clearer error messages. While acknowledging some current limitations in tooling and library availability compared to Erlang's mature ecosystem, the post ultimately presents Gleam as a promising alternative for building robust, concurrent applications, particularly for developers coming from other statically-typed languages who might find Erlang's syntax challenging.
Hacker News commenters generally expressed interest in Gleam, praising its friendly syntax and the benefits it inherits from the Erlang ecosystem, like the BEAM VM. Some saw it as a potentially strong competitor to Elixir, appreciating its stricter type system and simpler tooling. A few users familiar with Erlang questioned the necessity of Gleam, suggesting that learning Erlang directly might be more worthwhile. Performance comparisons with Elixir and other BEAM languages were also a topic of discussion, with some expressing hope for benchmarks. A recurring sentiment was curiosity about Gleam's potential to attract a larger community and gain wider adoption. Several commenters also appreciated the author's candid comparison between Gleam and Erlang, finding the article helpful for understanding Gleam's niche.
Summary of Comments ( 13 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43682547
Hacker News users generally expressed interest in the project, praising its approach to Protobuf type generation in TypeScript. Several commenters highlighted the advantages of avoiding code generation and runtime dependencies, contrasting it favorably with existing solutions like
protocandprotobufjs. Some questioned the handling of specific Protobuf features likeoneofandany, and discussions arose around potential performance implications and the project's compatibility with existing JavaScript Protobuf libraries. The author actively engaged with commenters, clarifying design choices and addressing technical questions about the project's inner workings. Overall, the reception was positive, with many seeing the project as a promising alternative for TypeScript Protobuf integration.The Hacker News post titled "Show HN: Zero-codegen, no-compile TypeScript type inference from Protobufs" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43682547) sparked a discussion with several interesting comments.
Many commenters expressed appreciation for the project's approach of avoiding code generation, which simplifies workflows and reduces potential maintenance overhead. One commenter highlighted the elegance of using generics for this purpose, contrasting it with the often cumbersome code generation processes they've encountered.
Several users brought up comparisons to other Protobuf tooling within the TypeScript ecosystem.
ts-protowas mentioned frequently, with some users highlighting perceived advantages and disadvantages of each project. The discussion touched upon performance characteristics, the level of type safety offered, and the developer experience in terms of setup and usage. One user specifically asked about the differences between the presented project andts-protoregarding how they handle optional fields and oneofs, indicating a desire to understand the nuances of each approach.One commenter inquired about the handling of nested messages and the generation of appropriate TypeScript types, which led to a brief discussion about the library's capabilities in this area. Another user raised the important point of how
protobuf-ts-typesmanages breaking changes introduced by modifications to the.protofiles, a crucial aspect for maintaining type safety in evolving projects.The topic of runtime type checking was also raised. While the project focuses on static type safety during development, one commenter questioned whether runtime validation against the inferred types is also performed, which could add an extra layer of robustness in production environments.
Overall, the comments section reflects a generally positive reception of the project, with users expressing interest in its unique approach and engaging in productive discussions comparing its features to existing solutions. The discussion also highlights key considerations for Protobuf tooling in TypeScript, including handling optional fields, oneofs, nested messages, breaking changes, and potential runtime type checking.