TypeScript

When writing robust TypeScript code, one crucial aspect that often gets overlooked is exhaustiveness in switch statements. Many developers, especially when working with union types, risk leaving out cases unintentionally. This isn’t just a theoretical concern—it can lead to unhandled runtime behavior and silent bugs that slip through

In a world where developers work across multiple teams and languages, it’s not uncommon to encounter consistent typos in data structures—especially when backend developers define API objects with misspelled property names. One classic example? The infamous misspelling of "parms" instead of "params". While it’

When writing TypeScript code, it’s common to import types from other files to structure and annotate your code more effectively. However, there's a subtle but powerful distinction between a regular import and an import type statement that many developers overlook. Mastering this feature can lead to cleaner,

Over the years of working with TypeScript, I've found myself avoiding one particular feature—not because it's broken or doesn't work, but because it just feels wrong in modern, maintainable JavaScript codebases. That feature is enum. Now don’t get me wrong: TypeScript enums

In every codebase, there are situations that should just never happen. Maybe it's a value that should have been validated earlier, or a branch in your logic that you’re 100% sure will never be executed. And yet… bugs happen. Instead of scattering throw new Error(...) statements throughout

As our TypeScript codebases grow, clarity and consistency become more important than clever tricks. One underrated but impactful practice is how we define return types—or more accurately, when we should and when we shouldn't. This article walks through my current recommendation (yes, it's changed a