Alternative proposal for grouping exported and local declarations #197
Conversation
| @@ -518,6 +518,10 @@ | |||
| "category": "Error", | |||
| "code": 2190 | |||
| }, | |||
| "All declarations of merged declaration '{0}' must be exported or not exported.": { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It took me a minute to understand this message - if we reported this, people would think we found a way to break the law of the excluded middle.
I might go with
A declaration of '{0}' must be consistent with its other declarations in their export behavior.
or use the following two messages
A merging declaration of '{0}' must be exported to be consistent with its other declarations.
A merging declaration of '{0}' must not be exported to be consistent with its other declarations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah the problem is the scope ambiguity. If 'All' takes wide scope, it is a tautology.
How about: "Individual declarations in a merged declaration must be all exported or all local.
I like Daniel's suggestions too
Strict mode support
| // we use SymbolFlags.ExportValue, SymbolFlags.ExportType and SymbolFlags.ExportNamespace | ||
| // to denote disjoint declarationSpaces (without making new enum type). | ||
| var declarationSpaces: SymbolFlags = 0; | ||
| var hasExport: boolean; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not just make this false?
Also, can you make this symbolHasExport?
|
@ahejlsberg do you have any comments or notes? |
|
👍 |
Alternative proposal for grouping exported and local declarations
This is another version of grouping exported and locals declarations (originally proposed as #37).
Implementation notes: