SSWConsulting / SSWConsulting/SSW.Rules.Content
9 year old rule
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- MDX
- Stars
- 62
- Forks
- 196
- Avg merge
- 1d 4h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 112
Description
Cc: @bradystroud @JackDevAU
Hi @wicksipedia ,
This rule is over 9 years old, small and the prescription it's making is odd.
https://ssw.com.au/rules/do-you-know-when-to-use-typescript-vs-javascript-and-coffeescript/
CoffeeScript seems to be mostly dead and TypeScript has such high adoption that I feel it should be more of a "Use TypeScript unless held at gunpoint" type of situation
- Update rule to make more sense in a modern setting
Weird old TypeScript rule
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Open the linked SSW rule and review its current guidance on TypeScript, JavaScript, and CoffeeScript. Update the rule for the modern technology landscape while preserving the site's documentation style; done means the published rule no longer makes the outdated prescription described in the issue.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- coffeescript, javascript, typescript
- Domain
- content, documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100