Echo JS 0.11.0

What does this have to do with Echo JS or development at all?  It's interesting, but I don't think this is the right place for this sort of thing.

No criteria for how the selected items were selected.

Interesting, not really JS based... what would be cool would be a similar client as a globally installable npm module that uses environment variable(s) to create an empty repo attached to an account/group as a command line client.

That would be JS based and pretty nifty/reusable.

Very cool... wish it supported docx etc.

I do appreciate Joi.

Nice article/writeup.  I find that if you are permitted to make heavy refactoring more of a norm, it's incredibly beneficial.  Outside of that, I'd rather not have it in the first place.  I tend to be pretty stringent in terms of project structure (discovery first), which tends to lessen the need.  It takes a lot of time to add all the typing information.  Also, as the article mentions adding to certain types of JS functions is painful at best.  Not to mention default linting is very strict and makes it even more difficult to bypass in practice.

As to JS tooling (babel specifically), odds are if you're using newer features, or supporting older browsers (IE), you'll need babel anyway (and likely multiple builds/targets).  async/await and conditional continuation operator (?.) are two of the big ones the former for old browsers, the latter just plain not in TS.

NOTE: it might be worth it to enable the types for better VS Code for outside libraries, which can improve things.  And/Or disabling all required usage for linting purposes, which will make it easier to bypass and opt in where really needed.

I'm firmly in the rather not have it category, but I can see the potential value.

Also, async/await are not based on generators... they are functions that return a promise, the use of generators is an implementation detail for babel transforms.

Why would async/await be future?  All current/modern browsers support it, and you can shim (via babel etc) for IE.

Sorry for the excessively gruff response (wrote more in my response to your coworker).

I apologize for the comment, I just happen to notice a lot of entries, and looking back at your blog, most articles are much more flushed out.  I try to read pretty much all articles on EchoJS, and most of the top 100 on hackernews every day and don't always keep all the sites correct in my mind.

I also tend to be much more critical of blog sites/entries that have relatively large portions of marketing blurbs attached; such as a lot of the Auth0 blogs that where at least half seemed like thin examples of using their service.  I'm also very critical when there's an opportunity to dive deeper into a more complex topic such as not only why we need workers, but also how we use workers.  Understanding that it's a work in progress feature.  The specific article in addition to an example for the new feature would have been to cover the browser version and how they compare and possibly an abstraction for using the same worker code for both.

Contrast this with the recent CSS Houdini article which was much more flushed out and included a simple example of how to use the new APIs.  Only critique there might have been to embed a working example (with a note of which browser(s) are supported).