Function#toString revision: JSDoc comments?

Isiah Meadows isiahmeadows at gmail.com
Sun Apr 17 10:07:22 UTC 2016


I don't like the idea of including preceding comments in
`Function.prototype.toString` itself on grounds it's harder to parse for
other related reasons.

As for anything including preceding comments, I'd be happy with something
somewhat independent, as long as it's not requiring JSDoc to be parsed. Not
that I have issues with that documentation format, but I don't think it
should be in the spec itself.

On Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 13:29 Jordan Harband <ljharb at gmail.com> wrote:

> As I see it, the primary purpose of the `Function#toString` proposal is to
> document what browsers already do, and tighten it down so they can't
> deviate further (which some browsers already have begun to do with "class",
> for example).
>
> "Preceding comments" would be a very hard thing to specify without unduly
> blessing an arbitrary documentation pattern, especially one that isn't
> universally considered to be a good thing.
>
> Reflection methods on functions are certainly a potential separate
> proposal, if you can make a compelling argument that it's a good idea to
> reflect on functions in this manner.
>
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Marius Gundersen <gundersen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Would it not be better to expose the names (and default values,
>> destructurings, etc) of the function arguments using reflection? For
>> example, Reflection.arguments(Math.max).then this method can return any
>> JSDoc it is able to parse.
>> On 16 Apr 2016 16:53, "Caitlin Potter" <caitpotter88 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> How would that interact with angular.js' Function.prototype.toString
>>> parsing? Seems like doing that could break some content, even if it were
>>> useful
>>>
>>> On Apr 16, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Axel Rauschmayer <rauschma at icloud.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Regarding this proposal:
>>> https://github.com/tc39/Function-prototype-toString-revision
>>>
>>> Wouldn’t it make sense to include a preceding JSDoc-style comment in a
>>> function’s (or method’s) `[[SourceText]]` value? Conceptually it is a part
>>> of the function and it could be used to implement a REPL `help()` function.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
>>> axel at rauschma.de
>>> rauschma.de
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> es-discuss mailing list
>>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> es-discuss mailing list
>>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20160417/3f88639d/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list