Statics #146
Statics #146
Conversation
test/test.ts
Outdated
| @@ -256,4 +256,14 @@ describe('vue-class-component', () => { | |||
| expect(parent.value).to.equal('parent') | |||
| expect(child.value).to.equal('child') | |||
| }) | |||
|
|
|||
| it('forwardStatics', function () { | |||
| debugger; | |||
src/component.ts
Outdated
| const rv = Super.extend(options); | ||
|
|
||
| for(let sttc in Component) | ||
| if(!(sttc in function() {}) && Component.hasOwnProperty(sttc)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know if hasOwnProperty will impact component inheritance. A test case should be helpful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Written like that, a child class doesn't forward the statics of its parent. hasOwnProperty means the the property is in the object, not its prototype.
I am not sure of the question, therefore I don't know if it answers - what do you mean by "impact component inheritance" ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider
@Compoent class Parent extends Vue { static config = {} }
@Compoent class Child extends Parent {}
Child.config // expect an object {}Written like that, a child class doesn't forward the statics of its parent.
I think you already understand me. And I even suspect whether we should support inheritance any way.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Indeed, Child.config would, in this implementation, retrieve undefined
Beside beeing the easiest to implement, I just checked on how typescript managed static' legacy, and it seems coherent with the usual behaviour.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's keep it simple. vue-class-component is for both Babel and TS users. Rolling out a babel compatible version might be challenging.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So, is it still a "change requested" or an acceptation?
src/component.ts
Outdated
| const rv = Super.extend(options); | ||
|
|
||
| for(let sttc in Component) | ||
| if(!(sttc in function() {}) && Component.hasOwnProperty(sttc)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
!(sttc in function() {})
Is this necessary? Looks like only using hasOwnProperty is enough.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This will for instance avoid statics to override name or apply
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why shouldn't they be overridden? Is that stated in the spec?
I think we should follow the es spec as possible since the user would expect it.
src/component.ts
Outdated
|
|
||
| for(let sttc in Component) | ||
| if(!(sttc in function() {}) && Component.hasOwnProperty(sttc)) | ||
| rv[sttc] = Component[sttc]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we rename rv to Extended and also sttc to key? I cannot see what the current name means...
src/component.ts
Outdated
| return Super.extend(options) | ||
| const rv = Super.extend(options); | ||
|
|
||
| for(let sttc in Component) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we add curly braces for for and if expressions?
|
@ktsn this implementation is not compatible with Babel, is this fine to you? |
|
@HerringtonDarkholme I think it's ok that it does not have partial feature of class like inheritance since we can incrementally add them when we need. But at least it should be consistent with es spec that we include into vue-class-component. |
|
Sorry for latency. |
|
@HerringtonDarkholme This looks good to me. Would you have any concern for this feature/implementation still? |
#135 (comment)
Class' static member are browsed and added to the generated class.