NIT:
undefined in index signatures --noImplicitOverride referenced same issue.

Fixed, thanks!

I want to give a huge shout out to the TypeScript team. You've just released an amazing 4.0.2 and you're already getting us excited for the next thing around the corner. As a burgeoning open-source developer it's inspiring, and you deserve all the success and praise.

I'm most excited about the potential introductions of /// comments and the override keyword.

@ifiokjr
Hey. How about get a preview and perhaps sends some feedback for the override?

You can see It here: #39669 (comment)

How about some basics?

#19573

Hi, another missing feature I have been awaiting for a long time is the typed errors.

As I wrote in a comment

This is the only feature I envy the java language

The issue is still labeled "Awaiting More Feedback", in my opinion there is not need to reinvent the wheel, if we can get some interest from the TS team I would with pleasure clarify possible use case scenario.

Can someone add the Iteration link to the Roadmap?
That would avoid me couple clicks each time I want to check the plan 😉

Thank You.... TypeScript is getting more awesome every iteration 😃

@ghiscoding done!

Would love to see some progress on nominal types (#202) for 4.1. I'm happy to help, but unsure how to do this. I posted some more details in #202 to keep this thread clean.

@typescript-bot create release-4.1

Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to create the release-4.1 branch for you. Here's the link to my best guess at the log.

@typescript-bot sync release-4.1

Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to sync release-4.1 with master for you. Here's the link to my best guess at the log.

@typescript-bot sync release-4.1

Heya @weswigham, I've started to sync release-4.1 with master for you. Here's the link to my best guess at the log.

@typescript-bot sync release-4.1

Heya @weswigham, I've started to sync release-4.1 with master for you. Here's the link to my best guess at the log.

@typescript-bot sync release-4.1

Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to sync release-4.1 with master for you. Here's the link to my best guess at the log.

When will TypeScript 4.1 Beta Release ?

@xiaoxiangmoe you can use nightly or in meanwhile:

4.1.0-beta 13 hours ago

See Versions from https://www.npmjs.com/package/typescript to get more information about builds.

@DanielRosenwasser Hello 👋 sorry to bother you but I was hoping to request that future blog posts for this release the wording on the --noUncheckedIndexedAccess could be redone.

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-4-1-beta/#no-unchecked-indexed-access

• Using Pedantic in the blogpost goes against the discussions we've already had about not using pedantic.
  

There have been entire issues on this repo dedicated to picking a name that did not imply pedantic. Having this in the blogpost after all this is not really nice.

• The explanation of this property does not really do it justice in my opinion.
  Every other feature on the changelog "Use this immediately, will help fix stuff! It's amazing"
  Index: "This causes too much noise and doesnt really fix much"

For example, the post mentions nothing of how impactful this change is to array destructuring. Numerous issues have been created on this repo for this problem such as #38287 #40749 #36635 #37045 which shows that this is quite a useful change to many TS users.

The major downsides that have been seen for those that have tested this is only in older legacy code where people use for loops. A lot of more recent code will not be using for loops like this except when every millisecond of performance matters and so therefore the biggest issue of this config isn't even that big an issue for majority of relevant code.

The post mentions nothing of how this option has been shown already to be improving performance and preventing runtime bugs which cause hours of debugging because the typings will not show any errors so you are forced to go line by line to figure out some bug in production. Nor does it mention that this is quite possibly one of if not the most request feature to TS and has been requested for years now. IMO the blog post should be encouraging the use of this option not discouraging it such as mentioning that the slightly extra noise created by this option is WELL worth the benefits gained from it.

I'll reconsider how it's phrased in the 4.1 RC/Final blog posts - you might be right that the tone deserves more optimism. But I'll reiterate that the feature is currently (currently) not one that the core team can definitely recommend that everyone uses. While we're open to changing our minds about this, and while the feature might improve in functionality over time, we're being intentionally being cautious in our tone to set expectations.