Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Doc(clientVariableScopes): Experimental annotations for clientVariableScopes #33

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 14, 2023

Conversation

magicaldave
Copy link
Member

@magicaldave magicaldave commented Oct 10, 2023

These ones I'm less confident in, I couldn't quite pin down how to document the table. I'm posting this one as a draft PR for review.

#15

@magicaldave magicaldave added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request labels Oct 10, 2023
@magicaldave magicaldave self-assigned this Oct 10, 2023
@magicaldave
Copy link
Member Author

This one is ready, I think. 👍

@HotaruBlaze
Copy link

HotaruBlaze commented Oct 10, 2023

It seems to be a mix of working and not working for me, my editor isn't liking the ? for some of the declarations, but the functions themselves look fine, though i wonder how much use this would end up being with all these annotations

STRING or STRING_BEGIN expected, got '?'

@magicaldave
Copy link
Member Author

Would appreciate an additional chime on this one as stylistically I don't like placing the ? operator after the field name. Documentation says it should be type name, and this style breaks one of my editors. Further review is needed.

@magicaldave magicaldave merged commit c23c062 into doc/annotations Oct 14, 2023
@magicaldave magicaldave deleted the doc/annotations-clientVariableScopes branch October 14, 2023 15:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants