It all sounds like an elaborate way to say: “just wait a little longer”. I understand the benefits of having to maintain only a single codebase, but the absence of a proper desktop solution is hampering my workflow considerably. Let me share my GoodNotes history with you:
Not for the first time, I would like to point out that this is yet another feature getting carried over from CoffeeScript, and yet everybody keeps making fun of CoffeeScript. So, if you want to use this feature, there is another option: just use CoffeeScript!
About “While some argue that TypeScript may become the next CoffeeScript…”: I think CoffeeScript will be the next CoffeeScript. TypeScript and CoffeeScript have *very* little in common in terms of ambition and approach.
Thanks! Helpful! I was trying to work out if I should switch to TypeScript, in particular if I don’t care too much about the added type safety or autocomplete support. If I hear you well, then basically what you’re saying is that TypeScript makes it more concise and it avoids unexpected
this behavior. I see what you’re saying on the latter part. Just…
Products can also be larger and smaller. Apparently they share that with epics. Do you have an example of an epic that clearly fits the epic description and yet cannot be productized?
Rene Altena Okay, here we go:
First of all, you are absolutely right in stating that I am not an organizational expert, and that I have a stronger background in mathematics. Still, I have been working with countless organizations in my more than 20 years of working experience, so I think that accounts for something.
Rene Altena :-) I appreciate all of your comments, and I will correct all the typos, contemplate anything else you said, and then probably stick to my opinion. :-) Think of this article as a collections of thoughts where I suspect there’s a 51% chance I got it right. Which might still mean I got it all wrong.