Skip to content

Allow JSDoc-style @link inline tags #514

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

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

Allow JSDoc-style @link inline tags #514

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

jonchardy
Copy link
Contributor

@jonchardy jonchardy commented May 23, 2017

This PR is meant to allow for standard JSDoc syntax of @link tags to be parsed by TypeDoc. JSDoc tags follow the standards laid out here: http://usejsdoc.org/tags-inline-link.html. The main difference between the current TypeDoc implementation (which remains as is), and JSDoc is the use of '#' rather than '.'.

See also #488. This is also resolved by this PR. Converting any instance of '#.' in a tag (valid JSDoc syntax to reference a static function) to '.@static', which can then be used to distinguish members of the same name and select the static version.

The last minor change is including 'static-' in the anchor of static members, which didn't work before. It is now done at the alias level to avoid unnecessary suffixes in names.

The overlying goal here is to allow users coming from JS/JSDoc environments to more quickly get up and running with TS/TypeDoc.

As a side note, this is my first PR for this project, so in addition to any flaws, let me know about style issues.

@jonchardy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this as it needs some adjustments after seeing http://usejsdoc.org/about-namepaths.html#namepaths-in-jsdoc-3

@jonchardy jonchardy closed this May 24, 2017
@jonchardy jonchardy deleted the Use-JSDoc-style-for-@link branch June 26, 2017 19:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant