Gentype: propagate more comments #6334
Conversation
| export const DecideSubject__placeholder: (run:string, times:number) => void = CommentsBS.DecideSubject._placeholder; | ||
|
|
||
| export const DecideSubject: { _placeholder: (run:string, times:number) => void } = CommentsBS.DecideSubject | ||
| export const DecideSubject: { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This const represents the DecideSubject module in Comments.res, and it has a comment in the original res file, but I cannot for the life of me figure out how to propagate that comment out to here. It would be very valuable though, comments for modules are important.
@cristianoc any ideas?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
gentype does not store info about modules.
It stores info about values, and what module they belong to.
I guess this would go to some separate module info somewhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After trying several different approaches with no luck I conclude this seem to require some fairly deep changes. Maybe I'm missing something valuable.
The rest in this PR is useful by itself - maybe we could review and merge what's in this PR, and then do module comments separately.
zth
force-pushed
the
gentype-more-comments
branch
from
66bba3f
to
f546358
Compare
zth
force-pushed
the
gentype-more-comments
branch
from
f546358
to
cc6210e
Compare
jscomp/gentype/GenTypeCommon.ml
Outdated
| @@ -2,6 +2,23 @@ module StringMap = Map.Make (String) | |||
| module StringSet = Set.Make (String) | |||
| module Config = GenTypeConfig | |||
|
|
|||
| module DocString : sig | |||
jscomp/gentype/GenTypeCommon.ml
Outdated
| @@ -2,6 +2,23 @@ module StringMap = Map.Make (String) | |||
| module StringSet = Set.Make (String) | |||
| module Config = GenTypeConfig | |||
|
|
|||
| module DocString : sig | |||
| type t | |||
| val make : string option -> t | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need this abstraction?
An explicit string option would remove make and the interface.
Unless this will change in future.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can probably do without it. It was mostly a way to make sense of all the places where we had docstrings, where they would occasionally be formatted as comments already, and occasionally not. But I can probably just make it a string option now again. Let me give it a shot.
This propagates more comments from the ReScript code to emitted TS code via gentype.