Is Typescript our Future?

Czemerys describes starting with little TypeScript experience before his team adopted it for a new module and eventually rewrote their code in it. He says optional static types can catch mistakes such as incorrect function arguments and misspelled names, and that teams can add types gradually.

In Visual Studio Code, autocomplete, error feedback, navigation, and automatic imports help him work without repeatedly checking documentation. He demonstrates using TypeScript’s `ReturnType` utility in a Redux app to derive component props from a selector, keeping types aligned as code changes.

TypeScript can add too much overhead to a small project, and migrating a large codebase takes time. Czemerys says complex type errors involving third-party libraries can be hard to diagnose, while Flow offers easier integration and, in his experience, stronger initial type inference. He also recalls Flow upgrades causing breaking changes and third-party library fixes.

For new React Native projects, Czemerys recommends a community template and TypeScript ESLint, with the compiler’s `noEmit` option to check types across the app in CI or locally. For migration, he describes converting modules gradually when business logic and UI are separated, and favors a fast, broad rewrite to avoid maintaining two type systems.

Czemerys sees TypeScript as a useful choice for some companies, especially those with large codebases and teams. He points to its community-maintained library typings and day-to-day tooling as its main strengths.