Web3.js: Typescript rewrite

[QuentinFchx]

Hi,

Now that the library is being split into smaller modules, are there any plans to use Typescript as the primary language? I won't list all the pros/cons as most of us already know what's at stake, I'd just point out that the current definition file is _^very often out-of-sync and it would help fixing this issue 🙂.

I'd gladly volunteer to start converting code (starting with web3-utils) but I'd like to know what's your stance on it.

Thank you in advance!

[frozeman]

You mean converting the whole lib to typescript?
Whats the benefit for smaller libs?
I dont know typescript myself. Could you list the pros and cons (besides that its typed)

[QuentinFchx]

In my experience, it makes it easier for external contributors to dive into the code (types bring accurate auto-completion and it feels "safe" to commit code that compiles).

The (only?) downside is that it adds a compilation step and requires developers (and especially active members such as you) to learn Typescript (considering the current complexity of the library it should be a joy ride).

Since 1.0 is split into relatively small packages, I think it makes it even easier to slowly migrate the codebase. We can start with web3-utils and rollback to plain-ol' JS if there is an issue.

I know this would be a big change, we can definitely wait for more feedback from other contributors to make sure it's the right decision 🙂. _{Plus I won't be available for 2 weeks starting Monday 😛}

[frozeman]

Hi,

we have currently the https://github.com/ethereum/web3.js/tree/1.0ES6 branch where we want to migrate to ES6, i think this is a good first step and should be done before thinking about typescript.

[justinmchase]

While I definitely prefer writing es6 over typescript, it can be nice for consumers of a library to have a typescript definition file published along with a module. It is a very detailed form of documentation that can be used by tools.

[frozeman]

we have that

[jaydp17]

@frozeman I agree that there are type definitions but a lot of them are marked as any, which doesn't provide any type information at all.
I'd also be willing to volunteer for some help on this.

[jpeletier]

The library should be rewritten to Typescript for the following reasons:

• Type safety! Dealing with smart contracts, making sure types are correct is a must!
• Write code once in Typescript, then have it generate targets for ES3, ES5, ES6, ES7 ... Only one codebase!
• Typings will be automatically generated and accurate. Always.

[nivida]

I think it would maybe also a good idea to use flow instead of typescript. I've ported web3 now to es6 and I think it would be much easier to get internal type safety with flow. 🤔

[jpeletier]

I've ported web3 now to es6

That's great! TypeScript is a superset of ES6, so all that ES6 is already TypeScript!🙂. This means you can gradually add types without having to type everything at once.

Here are some comments about TypeScript:

• Faster
• More type definitions
• Bigger community
• Open development
• Better documentation

In my opinion, this is where the community is going. Big projects within Ethereum, such as EthereumJS are moving to TypeScript.

Here is a good comparison:
https://github.com/niieani/typescript-vs-flowtype

[nivida]

@jpeletier Thanks yes I know TypeScript well I was doing before internall cross platform mobile apps with it and I really like it. But I think it's always good to do some research and to have the proof that it is exactly what we want for this specific use case :)

Thanks for the comparsion I will definitely have a look at it!

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions