> that's the typescript compiler, not typescript apps.

Of course it's the typescript compiler. What else is an implementation of "Typescript" that you could actually make faster? And how would Microsoft go to all Typescript users and re-implement their code in Go? How would that work?

But that doesn't change the simple fact that the Typescript compiler written in Typescript was too slow:

"As your codebase grows, so does the value of TypeScript itself, but in many cases TypeScript has not been able to scale up to the very largest codebases."

And to fix that performance problem, they had to reimplement Typescript (aka "the Typescript compiler") in Go. And that made it 10x faster.

And I am not sure you got "just transpire your code to Go" from, because I sure as hell didn't write it. And if you know it doesn't work like that, and I sure as hell didn't claim it works like that, why did you introduce this straw man?

This is all plain facts.

So yes: please stop the flaming. And please stop using Electron. Dennard scaling hasn't been with us for some time now.

▲

ajross 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Again, meh. I'm just happy you've admitted that the idea that Go is 10x faster than V8 is bunk. Use what you like. But like I said everyone else is using Electron and winning. I don't make the rules, I'm just trying to explain them.

	▲	mpweiher an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> you've admitted that the idea that Go is 10x faster than V8 is bunk. I admitted nothing of the sort. Where did you get that from? On a comparable project, Microsoft determined that (a) the performance of the existing JS solution was practically insufficient (b) doing a rewrite while keeping JS would not be sufficient (c) rewriting the TS/JS compiler in Go yielded an empirical speed boost of 10x. And once again, I never claimed that "Go is 10x faster than V8". Please do refrain from these straw-men arguments, it is not conducive to a good discussion. In general, however, it is true that JIT compilers perform far less well on real-world production code than they do on small synthetic benchmarks, and so the 10x performance penalty that Microsoft found empirically is well within the range of what is observed elsewhere. Overview and links to research here: https://blog.metaobject.com/2015/10/jitterdammerung.html And remember: this was a response to this comment: "well, what if we just made Javascript crazy fast instead?", and here we are." JavaScript is not "crazy fast". Whether it won or is otherwise just the bees knees is irrelevant. It ain't "crazy fast".