proposal-decorators
proposal-class-fields
Our great sponsors
proposal-decorators | proposal-class-fields | |
---|---|---|
64 | 27 | |
2,646 | 1,616 | |
1.2% | - | |
4.2 | 1.8 | |
about 2 months ago | over 2 years ago | |
HTML | ||
- | - |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
proposal-decorators
-
Making Web Component properties behave closer to the platform
Because many rules are common to many attributes (the coerceType operation is defined by WebIDL, or using similar rules, and the HTML specification defines a handful of microsyntaxes for the parseValue and stringifyValue operations), those could be packaged up in a helper library. And with decorators coming to ECMAScript (and already available in TypeScript), those could be greatly simplified:
-
The case for using decorators in your codebase
Decorators are currently not a part of the standard JavaScript language. They are still being discussed in tc39 and have reached proposal stage 3. This means the spec has more or less stabilized and we can use them but they would be transplied before being run in the browser. This would be done via babel or tsc for most users
-
JavaScript Naming Conventions are Important
JavaScript was created a long time ago, and at the time of its inception, the authors decided not to use affirmative prefixes for boolean names. Now, they do their best by continuing to follow their convention, even if it goes against the community's opinion. Even if the authors wanted to introduce new naming conventions in the specification, they could not do it, at least not coherently. Old code cannot be renamed because JavaScript must remain backward-compatible. And starting to write new code using new approaches is not a great idea either, as there would be two ways to do the same thing, which is also undesirable.
-
ECMAScript Decorators. The Ones That are Real
2016-07 – Stage 2. After the decorators proposal reached stage 2, its API began to undergo significant changes. Furthermore, at one point the proposal was referred to as "ESnext class features for JavaScript." During its development, there were numerous ideas about how decorators could be structured. To get a comprehensive view of the entire history of changes, I recommend reviewing the commits in the proposal's repository. Here is an example of what the decorators API used to look like:
-
Strawberry - Zero-Dependency, Build-Free JavaScript Framework
The example you've given isn't valid JavaScript, JS doesn't have decorators. (Although there is a stage 3 tc39 for it, afaik no browser has implemented it)
-
Updates from the 96th TC39 meeting
There was a decorators issue brought up in the meeting (issue 508) and decorators metadata, as noted in the article, is now at stage 3. So there's still active work being done on decorators. If I had to guess, I'd say they'd be a likely candidate for ES2024.
-
The Lightweight Alternative to GraphQL, Resolvers Instead of Endpoints
As per the proposal, decorators can be used with Classes and their elements such as fields, methods, and accessors. To leverage this feature, we need to ensure that our resolvers provider is an instance of a Class. Therefore, we will modify the code in src/api/users/users-resolvers.js to the following:
-
Using modern decorators in TypeScript
The modern version of decorators, which will be officially rolled out in TypeScript 5.0, no longer requires a compiler flag and follows the official ECMAScript Stage-3 proposal. Alongside a stable implementation that follows ECMAScript standards, decorators now work seamlessly with the TypeScript type system, enabling more enhanced functionality than the original version.
-
What should I do after react js
100% this. Going in depth of libraries will make you so much better developer than learning newest and coolest frameworks in JS ecosystem. Learn to create your own React, Promises, or anything you like in JS. It will give you immense perspective about these libraries. Once you start understanding them you will feel like they are not that complex and you can do it too. Go read TC39 proposals and issues people point out in them. You will see how JS is borrowing features from other languages.
-
Announcing TypeScript 5.0
The actual proposal gives the "@reactive" decorator as the first example, which just so happens is the only decorator that I use in my library with TypeScript's legacy decorator option. Was so happy to see they recognize this use case! https://github.com/tc39/proposal-decorators
proposal-class-fields
-
Why is nobody talking about how much Proxies break Vue 3?
Private methods: Pretty simple to explain, private methods and fields straight up do not work with ES6 proxies, its a known issue https://github.com/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/106
-
JS private class fields considered harmful
The #x syntax is ugly and many people don't like it. But if you understand how JavaScript works, you'll see that private x is not possible. Some comments on the proposal suggested private #x and there were plenty of other suggestions as well, it may be interesting to read through those discussions.
- Field declarations overwrite properties on the prototype
- Turning “hard private” into “soft private”
-
All JavaScript and TypeScript features of the last 3 years explained
> - # private... not sure why they didn't just use the "private" keyword, but I don't care. I almost always use TypeScript anyways
One of the reasons was to allow private and public fields of the same name, so that subclasses are free to add own public fields without accidentally discovering private fields. There were many more considerations that went into the design: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-class-fields/blob/main/PRIV....
There was a heated debate about this and the choice of the # sigil back in 2015 at the time private fields were being designed: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-private-fields/issues/14.
- ES2022 Features!
-
JavaScript Evolutsiyasi Qisqa Satrlarda!
Private class fieldlari va nihoyat classlarda access modifierlarni (private,static) qo'llash imkonini beruvchi sintaksis.
-
Create Ref using React.createRef without using constructor in React?
class App extends React.Component { constructor(props) { super(props); this.state = { counter: 0 }; }} but due to Babel's class-field support, I don't use it anymore
-
Correct use of arrow functions in React
I am using ReactJS with Babel and Webpack and using ES6 as well as the proposed class fields for arrow functions. I understand that arrow functions make things more efficient by not recreating the functions each render similar to how binding in the constructor works. However, I am not 100% sure if I am using them correctly. The following is a simplified section of my code in three different files.
-
React component design patterns for 2022
Working with constructor and calling super() before we can set state. Although this has been solved with the introduction of class fields in JavaScript, Hooks still provide a simpler API
What are some alternatives?
openapi-typescript - Generate TypeScript types from OpenAPI 3 specs
proposal-private-methods - Private methods and getter/setters for ES6 classes
proposals - Tracking ECMAScript Proposals
cross-project-council - OpenJS Foundation Cross Project Council
remult - Full-stack CRUD, simplified, with SSOT TypeScript entities
TypeORM - ORM for TypeScript and JavaScript. Supports MySQL, PostgreSQL, MariaDB, SQLite, MS SQL Server, Oracle, SAP Hana, WebSQL databases. Works in NodeJS, Browser, Ionic, Cordova and Electron platforms.
notes - TC39 meeting notes
proposal-decorator-metadata
proposal-private-fields - A Private Fields Proposal for ECMAScript
arktype - TypeScript's 1:1 validator, optimized from editor to runtime
proposal-observable - Observables for ECMAScript