Since JSDoc seems cerebrally dead...

Dan Peddle dan at flarework.com
Mon Aug 17 21:44:22 UTC 2020


It’s close, but not quite the same, from a cursory read. Thanks for sharing though. 

To respond to the original post, I don’t think something rigidly formal would work out given how many wildly different opinions are out there - thinking out loud, but perhaps something underlying similar to clojures meta information would enable other approaches. The data contained in jsdoc comments is similar... from a certain perspective. Annotations as first class data would let users come up with solutions without parsing comment bodies, and let that data break out of the walled gardens.

I don’t know what the syntax would look like, and still be backward compatible, which is where comments are a clear winner. 


> On 17. Aug 2020, at 22:09, Jacob Bloom <mr.jacob.bloom at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> > This feels like rich territory for a blog post, if someone feels qualified? Specifically, just running the typescript tool chain for jsdoc annotations, which are excellent for all the reasons mentioned above (comments only, vanilla js etc).
> 
> Does this count? https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/how-to-upgrade-to-typescript-without-anybody-noticing-part-1/
> 
>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 2:56 PM Dan Peddle <dan at flarework.com> wrote:
>> This feels like rich territory for a blog post, if someone feels qualified? Specifically, just running the typescript tool chain for jsdoc annotations, which are excellent for all the reasons mentioned above (comments only, vanilla js etc).
>> 
>>>> On 17. Aug 2020, at 19:35, Andrea Giammarchi <andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sorry, new link:
>>> https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/jsdoc-supported-types.html
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 8:34 PM Andrea Giammarchi <andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> TS supports JSDocs already
>>>> https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/type-checking-javascript-files.html#supported-jsdoc
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 8:31 PM Bergi <a.d.bergi at web.de> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> > They don't want to add TS to their stack.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Then what else would they want to add to their stack? Notice one doesn't
>>>>> necessarily need the TypeScript Compiler to add TypeScript- or Flow-like
>>>>> type annotations and remove them in a build step - Babel for example
>>>>> could do that just fine as well.
>>>>> Or are you asking for a jsdoc-like thing that lives in comments, where
>>>>> the code can be run without a compilation step?
>>>>> 
>>>>> kind regards,
>>>>>  Bergi
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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/20200817/96939486/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list