microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript

Add Support for Flow's new component syntax

オープン
#58,246 コメント 9 件 リアクション 9 件 担当者 0 名 GitHub で見る

まだ誰も着手していません。

In Discussion Suggestion
主要言語
Go
スター
111k
フォーク
14.4k
平均マージ
1日 19時間
マージ済み PR(30日)
117

説明

🔍 Search Terms

"syntax", "flow", "component", "tsx"

✅ Viability Checklist
⭐ Suggestion

First of all, I'd like to apologize; this request doesn't satisfy the last three viability checks. But I couldn't submit this if I didn't mark them. That said, if someone from the typescript team could at least read this proposal, I would be extremely grateful.

Recently, flow has added a new syntax to write components and hooks. For react devs, that's huge, and as someone who uses (and loves) typescript, I'd love to have something like this on TSX files too.

I understand that there are a few limitations on what can be done in typescript; for example, I don't expect typescript to check the rules of hooks and other react-specific things. I know that things like Solid and Stencil also use JSX.

To be completely blunt: I WANT SUGAR. Most influencers covering this new feature mentioned that it's extremely unlikely that Typescript will implement it. But I decided to try anyway, even if just to understand the reason.

In a more practical sense, here's what I would expect to see in a realist scenario:

  • The changes would only affect TSX files.
  • component blocks would be transpiled into function components.
  • hook blocks would be transpiled into functions.
  • Render types are nice. If I'm correct there's some arcane way of doing the same in typescript, but getting something more explicit wouldn't hurt.
📃 Motivating Example

Here's the post that explains what I'm talking about: https://medium.com/flow-type/announcing-component-syntax-b6c5285660d0

💻 Use Cases
  1. What do you want to use this for? Pure and refined Syntax Sugar.
  2. What shortcomings exist with current approaches? For components, there are 5-6 ways to deal with props currently, but the new component syntax has the potential to unify how things are done, reducing friction for new developers in large code bases. I recommend checking this video: https://youtu.be/HOFIefkepMA?si=i45CFr72m2GCaH5l
  3. What workarounds are you using in the meantime? It's not impossible to write another tool that will take this syntax and output typescript, but that would be yet another tool in an already bloated web dev ecosystem.

コントリビューションガイド

コントリビューションガイドを開く

はじめの一歩

  1. issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
  2. 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
  3. リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
  4. issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。

調査の方向性

まず、リンクされている Flow component-syntax proposal を読み、その component ブロックと hook ブロックを、要求されている TSX-only の動作と比較します。関連する TypeScript compiler entry points とテストを特定する前に、構文、render 型、および関数のトランスパイル要件を定義します。この提案に合意済みでテスト可能なスコープが定められれば完了です。

索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。

評価

技術スタック
typescript
領域
compilers
issue の種類
機能追加
難易度
5/5
見積もり時間
1週間以上
活発さ
停滞
明瞭さ
おおむね明確
初心者へのやさしさ
25/100

新しい issue をメールで受け取る

初心者向けの GitHub issue を短くまとめたダイジェスト。