Why I Prefer Static Typing

I’ve been writing TypeScript for a few years now, and I rarely want to go back to plain JavaScript for anything non-trivial. Here’s why.

Catch mistakes earlier

With static typing, the compiler catches a large class of bugs before the code ever runs. Typos in property names, wrong argument types, and undefined where you expected a value—these surface at build time instead of in production.

function greet(name: string): string {
  return `Hello, ${name}!`;
}

greet(42); // Error: Argument of type 'number' is not assignable to parameter of type 'string'

Better tooling

Type information powers autocomplete, inline documentation, and refactoring. When you rename a variable or change an interface, your editor can update every reference. That confidence makes larger codebases more manageable.

Self-documenting code

Types serve as inline documentation. A function signature like (userId: string, options?: FetchOptions) => Promise<User> tells you a lot without opening the implementation. In team settings, this reduces the need for external docs that drift out of date.

---

None of this is to say that dynamic languages are wrong—they excel at prototyping and certain domains. But for applications that need to scale and be maintained over time, static typing has become my default choice.