microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript
Comment inference with type inference
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
- Lingua principale
- Go
- Stelle
- 111k
- Fork
- 14.3k
- Merge medio
- 2g 4h
- PR unite (30g)
- 132
Descrizione
Suggestion
🔍 Search Terms
Comment inference, documentation
✅ Viability 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, new syntax sugar for JS, etc.)
- This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript's Design Goals.
⭐ Suggestion
Infer documentation/comments for inferred types.
📃 Motivating Example
I heavily use functions with dependency injection - this frequently means having a unit version of a function, as well as a convenience version with some of the arguments already applied.
For example, let's say I have a function:
/**
* Great documentation here!
*/
function cook(food: Food, spices: Spice[], pot: Pot, pan: Pan) {
// ...
}
I might have lots of functions like these, all of them may have different dependencies.
Somewhere in the top layers of my application, I'm going to bootstrap my function dependencies using functional applications:
function bootstrap(pot: Pot, pan: Pan) {
return {
cook: (food: Food, spices: Spice[]) => cook(food, spices, pot, pan),
cleanUp: () => cleanUp(pot, pans),
// ...and so on...
}
}
The problem here is, the documentation for the original function is lost.
I don't want to copy/paste all my documentation and maintain several copies. So I'm left with the choice of leaving the internal unit function undocumented, and explicitly writing out an interface for the bootstrap return-type, giving up the convenience of inference - or leaving the bootstrapped functions undocumented.
There aren't really good choices.
Could we have something like this maybe?
function bootstrap(pot: Pot, pan: Pan) {
return {
/** @inferdoc */
cook: (food: Food, spices: Spice[]) => cook(food, spices, pot, pan),
/** @inferdoc */
cleanUp: () => cleanUp(pot, pans),
}
}
This would follow the inferred type to it's type and infer (copy) the documentation from there.
We have something like this for classes with @inheritdoc, but nothing for functions.
💻 Use Cases
Everything. 😄
I don't know of any work-arounds - I would love to hear of any.
IDE support is crucial here. Not repeating documentation is important. Inference is important - I don't want repeated declarations. I'm already repeating the argument declarations, which isn't great, but I don't think there's any way around that? (It's possible the real issue here is that we need stronger inference for function types? Something that works better for very common patterns like functional applications? Might kill two birds with one stone.)
Guida per i contributori
Apri la guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Direzione di ricerca
Inizia esaminando il comportamento esistente di @inheritdoc e gli obiettivi di progettazione di TypeScript, quindi traccia il modo in cui i tipi inferiti e la documentazione vengono esposti nel supporto per gli IDE. L’issue non indica file né test, quindi individua i percorsi rilevanti del compilatore e dell’editor prima di proporre un approccio. Il lavoro sarà considerato completato quando esisterà un modo supportato per inferire la documentazione delle funzioni senza modificare l’output di runtime di JavaScript.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Valutazione
- Stack tecnologico
- typescript
- Ambito
- compilers, developer-experience
- Tipo di issue
- Funzionalità
- Difficoltà
- 5/5
- Tempo stimato
- Più di una settimana
- Stato di attività
- Ferma
- Chiarezza
- Abbastanza chiara
- Idoneità per principianti
- 30/100