Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Fix doc printer missing [] around tuple type #6523

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Jun 28, 2020
Merged

Fix doc printer missing [] around tuple type #6523

merged 4 commits into from Jun 28, 2020

Conversation

SyrupThinker
Copy link
Contributor

deno doc generates the following incorrect documentation for this file.

function one(i: Generic<number, string>): Generic<number, string>

function two(i: GenericTwo<number, string>): GenericTwo<number, string>

interface Generic

interface GenericTwo

With the tuple type printing fixed it now generates this documentation:

function one(i: Generic<[number, string]>): Generic<[number, string]>

function two(i: GenericTwo<number, string>): GenericTwo<number, string>

interface Generic

interface GenericTwo

@ry
Copy link
Member

ry commented Jun 27, 2020

Thanks @SyrupThinker! can you add a test?

bartlomieju
bartlomieju previously requested changes Jun 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
cli/tests/integration_tests.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test_util/src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
ry
ry approved these changes Jun 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ry ry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM - nice fix and test @SyrupThinker

@ry ry merged commit 660f86f into denoland:master Jun 28, 2020
@SyrupThinker SyrupThinker deleted the doc_print_tuple_type branch July 13, 2020 14:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ry ry ry approved these changes

@bartlomieju bartlomieju Awaiting requested review from bartlomieju

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@SyrupThinker @ry @bartlomieju