-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
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
Add more information on return type of methods #106
Comments
I was just about to create an issue for this as well. It'd be great to have the return types parsed like everything else is, rather than just a string. |
Try my fork out, let me know if you improve it further and submit PRs to it. I have it on npm as typescript-parser-deluxe. This repo is too sluggish to rely on |
Did you mean that your fork provides the return type structure? Or that I should get it in there & PR? I tried typescript-parser-deluxe and the return type is still provided as: I'll see what I can do about getting it to provide it in a structured way. I have a feeling that the reason that it provides the return type as a string like that is because the referenced types are unknown. I'm going to try parsing the node/es6 declarations as well as my own and see if that helps the parser fill in the blanks... Edit: after testing with a simplified return type (an object with static proprties set to constant values) it still provides the return type as a string. I'll look into the changes required to get the return type provided as a structure rather than a string. Cheers for your help @jpike88 |
Both! I will ensure the library is kept up to date. You'll notice a |
@jpike88 Would the pull request #101 be something that would be desirable in your typescript-parser-deluxe ? The most important commit was the first one which is called: 'Added better js types' What it does basically is add better type detection more so for JS then TS. If so I will work on merging it into it. |
Yep go for it |
The type variable is all string, how can we improve analysis to get at its structure?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: