I would fix this by undoing the change to lib.d.ts, which is a nonstarter, but which I see as a mistake. I do actually think your point is valid: fixing is better than complaining. But I also think language devs should fix iterator bugs in under two years.
I have seen the remark you're replying to hundreds of times throughout my career. I've seen probably thousands of complaints about out-of-date exploits or bad kits or including new injections and so on... This isn't infosec, but it IS still FOSS.
I've always considered the reminder that open source loves contributions to be a gentle reminder that:
* Most FOSS isn't sponsored.
* Most FOSS developers/maintainers aren't treated with much courtesy when things go wrong. "you broke my build!" etc.
* Without FOSS, a vibrant, interesting world would not exist within our computers, and even though its easy to forget, that world requires a rather significant amount of work for it to turn.
Ofc not everyone is a compiler expert. But everybody can help, and certainly everybody can TRY to help. Framing an issue like this with "hey, I'm not a compiler expert but there's this bug and I would love for it to be fixed, I wouldn't even know where to start... It's an older bug, what's the plan?" is much more courteous of the maintainers than "this shit is broke why don't u fix it?!"
I'm exaggerating just to illustrate the spectrum. Better and worse examples can be found all across the fossverse. Hell in just the Linux kernel alone there's a whole village of different personalities.
My point to all this: it's a very common remark, goes back ages, and I think it's a fantastic denominator to remind people the logistics of foss and human beings.
Hey FWIW I'm aware I'm more or less trying to hijack a release thread with my gripe. I don't think this should be standard practice for FOSS. In my defense though, I waited for years on this bug, I like TypeScript, I want to use it and evangelize it, and this (pretty fundamental) bug has languished meanwhile we got... module types? I'm pretty sure 99.9999% of devs will never use those. I bet they use iterators though.
Also I already have a job, and TypeScript is a Microsoft product with many Microsoft engineers working on it every day. Let's not portray it as entirely the altruism of some saintly engineers donating their time. We're not talking about OpenBSD here.
Always remember this: you have different priorities than other users, than other contributors, and than the core team. I for example find import types useful for lazy loading modules, while I’ve never run into this bug in years of writing TS.
If there is a bug or feature that really matters to you and that you feel is not being prioritized:
- Contribute a fix
- Convince someone to contribute a fix
- Complain enough that someone contributes a fix (which shouldn’t work but sadly often does)
Otherwise it will be fixed when it is fixed.
(I am biased because I work with the TS team. However this is just general open source stuff, I’m not speaking professionally)
Sure, that's good advice. But all that stuff already happened here except for "complain enough".
Also I didn't realize lazy loading was a common need. Does that mean that awkward syntax is going to be everywhere? Surely there's a better way to get that, like with an import lazy keyword. Really anything would be better.
The `import<TModule>(url: string): Promise<TModule>` syntax/special function was what the TC39 committee agreed to for lazy/dynamic imports after much bikeshedding. It's a Stage 3 ES proposal [1], which means it is likely in the next ES spec version, and is already supported in some browsers and many tools (such as webpack).
We expect contributions from everyone thats the motive behind OpenSource And not just being transparent of code