JSDoc

“JSDoc is not as powerful as TypeScript types but that might be fine for your use case”

“TypeScript benefits can be had without a build step by leveraging JsDoc”

“you do not need a build step and the javascript you ship to the browser would be the same you write in your editor”

“if you really need its key features just add JSDoc and Zod to any given vanilla JS codebase”

“Just make it a habit to write your types in JSDoc be done with it. It's so much nicer in every way.”

“JSDoc is ugly, clumsy, and leads to worse types on average over time.”

“JSDoc has been around for more than twenty years and most implementations have never had most of the capabilities you're describing.”

“Things like type star imports, destructured imports or satisfies operator don't work in jsdoc.”

“This. Or use ts-blank-space if you prefer TypeScript over JSDoc.”

“It's not perfect, but it gets you a long way.”

“there were annoying things that you would expect would work in JSDoc, but didn't quite”

“this gets messy, repetitive and it's difficult to use algebraic types”

“JSDoc doesn't support everything you need in TypeScript and there is a lot of inlining”

“Types for classes work exactly the same way”

“The advantage of JSDoc is that the TypeScript compiler treats it as equivalent to TypeScript source code”

“I'm simply pointing out that using JSDoc is using TypeScript. It's the same language service.”

“tuples, `&` operator, and even generics all work perfectly well inside a `@type` declaration”

“@callback works the most of the time, except in such cases where these JSDoc tags don't work nicely together”

“You can either define your types in JSDoc comments or in .ts files.”

“Aside from the following, JSDoc is absolutely TypeScript.”

“Whatever I do, there is always a error. Meanwhile, it does not take much to TS code to work.”

“I prefer not to add typescript lib and an additional build step”

“I've not yet come across a use-case JSDoc couldn't handle”

“JSDoc works great for buildless application setups!”

“That's technically a fair complaint but feels like a minor nitpick.”

“I haven't run into anything you can do in TypeScript that you can't do in JSDoc.”

“Support for generics is limited in JSDoc compared to TypeScript, especially when arrow function is involved.”

“JavaScript with JSDoc is much more verbose, with a lot of limitations”

“it's more annoying than just writing TypeScript”

“i think this is a good practice for every developer”

“The list of things jsdoc cannot do is long but a simple example is overloading”

“JSDoc lets you do pretty much everything that isn't a runtime feature of TypeScript”

“it makes code less dense because it lives outside the function parameters”

“JSDoc does actually have generic slots with the @template tag. Actually using them in practice is a little unintuitive”

“Modern HTML/CSS with Web Components and JSDoc is underrated.”

“jsdoc is nice because you don’t have to write the non-helpful types.”

“whenever I define a lambda, I need to add an doc type”

“there are plenty things you can't express in jsdoc but can in typescript”

“it's quite nice to just be able to copy them to new projects and have it all work without a build step”

“Type safety matters on the tooling side anyway.”