microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript

[Design Policy] Consider JSDoc feature parity with Typescript

Aperta
#30,624 14 commenti 27 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Awaiting More Feedback Suggestion
Lingua principale
Go
Stelle
111k
Fork
14.3k
Merge medio
1g 19h
PR unite (30g)
117

Descrizione

Search Terms

jsdoc parity, jsdoc equivalence, jsdoc

Suggestion

The JSDoc mode of TypeScript is very useful in cases where a build step (esp for node libraries for example) isn't desired or when other constraints prevent not writing in JS. However it can be annoying when trying to implement something that can't be expressed in JSDoc mode due to requiring Typescript syntax.

As such I would like to propose that TypeScript ensures that anything that can be written inside a .ts file can be expressed (in at least some way) within a pure javascript + jsdoc file.

In order to get an idea of the current scope needed for feature parity this is a list of issues and features that break parity between the two modes (if any are missing just say and I'll add to the list):

  • [Bug?] No way to express the object type
    • Currently in JSDoc /** @type {object} */ is equivalent to /** @type {any} */, there doesn't seem to be any way to represent const x: object purely in JS + JSDoc, this seems like a bug. Fixed
  • interface
  • abstract class
  • protected/private members Fixed
  • function overloading v5.0
  • defaults for generics
  • declare syntax in it's various forms and declaration merging
    • declare global { ... }
    • declare module "moduleName"
    • declare class Foo
    • declare interface
    • declare namespace
  • namespace
  • enum
    • /** @enum */ is not quite equivalent
  • as const v4.5
  • non-null assertion expr!

Checklist

My suggestion meets these guidelines:

  • [✓] This wouldn't be a breaking change in existing TypeScript/JavaScript code
  • [✓] This wouldn't change the runtime behavior of existing JavaScript code
  • [✓] This could be implemented without emitting different JS based on the types of the expressions
  • [✓] This isn't a runtime feature (e.g. library functionality, non-ECMAScript syntax with JavaScript output, etc.)
  • [✓] This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript's Design Goals.

Guida per i contributori

Apri la guida per i contributori

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Direzione di ricerca

Inizia esaminando le lacune di parità JSDoc elencate, incluse interface, abstract class, declaration forms, namespace, enum e non-null assertions. Segui le issue referenziate relative a function overloading, generic defaults e as const, quindi determina quali lacune rimangono e definisci i criteri di completamento per ogni capacità proposta.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Valutazione

Stack tecnologico
javascript, typescript
Ambito
compilers
Tipo di issue
Funzionalità
Difficoltà
5/5
Tempo stimato
Più di una settimana
Stato di attività
Ferma
Chiarezza
Da chiarire
Idoneità per principianti
25/100

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.