Function#toString revision: JSDoc comments?

Axel Rauschmayer rauschma at icloud.com
Wed Apr 20 06:51:07 UTC 2016


My initial motivation was to create a Python-style help() function. But I agree that it’s probably better not to depend on this mechanism.



> On 16 Apr 2016, at 19:28, 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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:rauschma at icloud.com>> wrote:
> 
>> Regarding this proposal: https://github.com/tc39/Function-prototype-toString-revision <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 <mailto:axel at rauschma.de>
>> rauschma.de <http://rauschma.de/>
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
axel at rauschma.de
rauschma.de

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20160420/23db10a4/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list