JavaScript has a long and storied history, but its creation is nothing short of a whirlwind. Originally called LiveScript, it was renamed JavaScript in 1995 to capitalize on the popularity of Java, despite having no technical connection to it. Its adoption was swift, and it became the backbone of the web application revolution, gaining near-universal support across web browsers. Today, JavaScript is arguably the most widely used programming language in the world.
That being said, I’m not a fan. I’ve often compared JavaScript to assembly language in the context of web browsers. While assembly code is undeniably powerful, we rely on higher-level languages for a reason. The browser, which has evolved into the true operating system of the modern era, deserves a language that abstracts away the complexities of low-level programming. JavaScript, for all its historical importance, should follow the same trajectory as assembly—becoming a relic in the eyes of most developers.
There’s no denying JavaScript’s widespread success and its role in shaping the web. The web as we know it today owes much to JavaScript, and people have done remarkable things with it despite its inherent shortcomings. But personally, I can’t shake the feeling that JavaScript isn’t a language we should continue writing by hand, much like how few developers still engage directly with assembly code today.
This brings me to TypeScript, a language that I find far more compelling. Designed by Anders Hejlsberg, TypeScript offers all the benefits of JavaScript but with the added power of a robust type system. This type system makes it more expressive and manageable, addressing many of JavaScript’s weaknesses. In fact, I struggle to understand why anyone would still prefer JavaScript over TypeScript for modern web development.