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

.jsx vs .js extension #41

Closed
karatechops opened this issue Jan 15, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

.jsx vs .js extension #41

karatechops opened this issue Jan 15, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@karatechops
Copy link
Contributor

I'm curious about using the .jsx extension for stateless components. Last I checked this was not recommended - I haven't done much research on the topic recently. I'm game to keep the .jsx extension if there's reasoning behind it, otherwise I think we should keep the extensions consistent with the rest of the project.
@RyanCCollins
Copy link
Member

I think the generator is just setup to do that, but I agree that .js extension is fine.

BTW, I just left a comment about the comma dangle thing. Maybe we should open up an issue about stylistic stuff so that we can talk about it. I will try to be on the same page, but there are a few patterns that might be difficult to break for me (noted in the comment).

@RyanCCollins RyanCCollins mentioned this issue Jan 15, 2017
Open
@RyanCCollins
Copy link
Member

Got a fix coming for this 😄

@RyanCCollins
Copy link
Member

Fixed with #44

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@karatechops @RyanCCollins