Since TypeScript is developed by Microsoft, its fair to say that support for TypeScript will always be best in Microsoft's Visual Studio.

> support for TypeScript will always be best in Microsoft's Visual Studio.

That typo is actually the problem. If they don't decide to make TypeScript a Visual Studio feature.

But my point is that VS Code would not be an alternative to Emacs if you could only use it for TS and Emacs wouldn't exist any more, if all that you could do with it was programming (Common) Lisp.

Hmm, what if VS Code was done in WASM with the ability to write extensions in any language with compilers that can produce WASM?

Any obvious reasons this would be a good/bad idea?

That wouldn't work, because WASM can't (directly, you need some JS bridge) interact with the DOM. Btw. you can transpile many languages to JS.

Webassembly is the same as being able to call C libs (which don't have to be written in C) from Python. It's there to speed up bottlenecks.

Wouldn't it make more sense to design browsers where a WASM runtime interacts with the DOM (and architecturally make it look more like a device driver)? And you could just compile JS to WASM on demand (and possibly keep a cache).