Add field declarations for all core classes

[willeastcott]

This PR adds field declarations for all classes in the src/core folder. This improves the Typedocs, changing this:

Into this:

It also further aligns the code with TypeScript, where field declarations are mandatory.

I confirm I have read the contributing guidelines and signed the Contributor License Agreement.

[kungfooman]

You are rolling through this like a champ, very nice to see the progress 👍 🎯

May the JSDoc shackles be forgotten at some point 😅

[willeastcott]

Wouldn't that be great? Have you inspected the Typedoc output yet? What do you think of the styling and layout compared to the JSdoc output?

[kungfooman]

So far I can see some pros and cons, lets just take one example to make it specific:

I think the presentation of a factual data in TypeDoc is:

1. overly "typified", which makes it rather confusing to read
2. redundant
3. taking too many new lines, which creates a lot of "air" inbetween
4. numVerts??: number is simply ugly compared to [numVerts]
5. the addiction to : everywhere, creating ASCII soup that brain/eyes need to filter away

typedoc signature: computeMinMax(vertices: number[] | Float32Array, min: Vec3, max: Vec3, numVerts??: number): void

While in JSDoc there is a short line that looks like something you can copy straight into the source code with minimal changes:

JSDoc signature: computeMinMax(vertices, min, max, [numVerts])

JSDoc presents what I really want to see/copy/use, in a short line.

Another example:

"returns a BoundingBox Returns Returns BoundingBox" 🤔

It nearly feels like 3 or 4 times as big as it "really" needs to be. They somehow got addicted to putting that : everywhere, as if that helps.

What I like about TypeDoc is the link to the actual source code.

Or the search just feels better:

JSDoc finds nothing:

So my feeling is that typedoc is technically more "aware" of certain things, but the representation absolutely needs to be improved. While I like JSDoc for its simple presentation of exactly what I want to see.

Hm, I thought that typedoc supports @typedef's but it doesn't 😢

/**
 * Super typey type.
 * 
 * @typedef {object} SuperTypeyType
 * @property {number} a - The a.
 * @property {number} b - The b.
 */

Feels still better in JSDoc, even tho it's a 404 that would need to be created:

Edit: What do you think about displaying all inherited methods in every class? JSDoc filters them, which I think makes it shorter and displays what's "important" for the actual class, making it more readable 🤔

[willeastcott]

@kungfooman This is great feedback. I get what you say about the verbosity of the Typedoc output. But I guess anyone developing against TypeScript are going to love it! 😄

At the moment, the Typedoc output is highly experimental, and of course, it just uses the default template for now. It is no doubt customizable (although I don't know to what extent). I think I'll continue to experiment as see where it goes....