You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 19, 2019. It is now read-only.
Currently, we do not explicitly handle the transformation of SyntaxKind.ModuleDeclaration.
As per discussions with Andy, we want to move more towards modifiers being applied as booleans on the node, rather than persisting the array of modifiers (where possible).
Because we are falling back with deeplyCopy(), we are also currently persisting name from the original TSNode, whereas we should be using id.
E.g. the refactored AST diff would be something like:
I do not believe this change will have a negative impact on linting capabilities, and downstream dependencies can easily be updated to check for the boolean.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently, we do not explicitly handle the transformation of
SyntaxKind.ModuleDeclaration
.As per discussions with Andy, we want to move more towards modifiers being applied as booleans on the node, rather than persisting the array of
modifiers
(where possible).Because we are falling back with
deeplyCopy()
, we are also currently persistingname
from the originalTSNode
, whereas we should be usingid
.E.g. the refactored AST diff would be something like:
I do not believe this change will have a negative impact on linting capabilities, and downstream dependencies can easily be updated to check for the boolean.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: