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
We should introduce an optional property on types so we can manually classify them as one of our known pseudo types:
proxy
module
view
pseudo
Basically we assume anything extending from Ti.Module (or in Global namespace) is a 'module', anything extending from 'Ti.proxy' is a 'proxy', anything extending 'Ti.UI.View' is a 'view' and all others are 'pseudo'.
But when trying to document Node.js shims, they're all getting marked as 'pseudo' (which ends up with the info box saying they're an abstract type).
I assume TypeScript has some nomenclature for declaring types as "abstract/pseudo" versus "normal"? I'd like to flag the top-level node.js shims and 'module's, and any classes they expose as non-abstract types (though they're not really proxies?).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We should introduce an optional property on types so we can manually classify them as one of our known pseudo types:
Basically we assume anything extending from
Ti.Module
(or inGlobal
namespace) is a'module'
, anything extending from'Ti.proxy'
is a'proxy'
, anything extending'Ti.UI.View'
is a'view'
and all others are'pseudo'
.But when trying to document Node.js shims, they're all getting marked as
'pseudo'
(which ends up with the info box saying they're an abstract type).I assume TypeScript has some nomenclature for declaring types as "abstract/pseudo" versus "normal"? I'd like to flag the top-level node.js shims and
'module'
s, and any classes they expose as non-abstract types (though they're not really proxies?).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: