Like I have said elsewhere, Haskell and Rust and other such languages actually force you (to varying degrees) to write programs that are soundly typed at compile time. TypeScript explicitly doesn't, and instead treats program types in a way that's far more like Java or C# (which rely on both compile time and runtime type checking to enforce a program's types, and even at that are not entirely sound) without the runtime type checking to back it up.
> Typescript could do the same if they desired, and in fact I think they offer the option.
They very explicitly do not and have stated severally that it is not within the goals of the project to do so, which is something anyone actually familiar with the language should know.
> Compiling a language with a type system to a language without is not a knock against that language's type system
When you don't cherry-pick statements out of context, the point of what I said becomes rather obvious; if a language doesn't actually guarantee type safety at compile time, having a primary compilation target that takes a fascinatingly lax approach to data types is objectively worse (wrt type safety) than having one that's more strict.
> Typescript could do the same if they desired, and in fact I think they offer the option.
They very explicitly do not and have stated severally that it is not within the goals of the project to do so, which is something anyone actually familiar with the language should know.
> Compiling a language with a type system to a language without is not a knock against that language's type system
When you don't cherry-pick statements out of context, the point of what I said becomes rather obvious; if a language doesn't actually guarantee type safety at compile time, having a primary compilation target that takes a fascinatingly lax approach to data types is objectively worse (wrt type safety) than having one that's more strict.