I don't see any mention of class/object shorthand methods; would these be
trivial, do you think?
```
class FooClass {
@dec1 @dec2
bar () { }
}
const fooObj = {
@dec1 @dec2
bar () { }
}
```
--------------------------
Dammit babies, you've got to be kind.
On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 11:49, Андрей Губанов <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Here I described my thoughts about this topic
> https://github.com/finom/function-decorators-proposal. The main idea of
> moving forward with function decorators is to make them behave like there
> were defined and wrapped by another function, not more, and get rid of any
> hoisting when they're used.
>
> Function expression and arrow functions
>
> const foo = @decorator1 @decorator2 function bar() { return "Hello" }
> // Will become:
> const foo = decorate([decorator1, decorator2], function bar() { return
> "Hello" });
>
> And
>
> const foo = @decorator1 @decorator2 () => "Hello"
> // Will become:
> const foo = decorate([decorator1, decorator2], () => "Hello");
>
>
> <https://github.com/finom/function-decorators-proposal#function-declarations>Function
> declarations
>
> And this is the most important. I propose to make a decorated function
> declaration behave as let definition.
>
> @decorator1 @decorator2 function foo() { return "Hello" }
> // Will become:
> let foo = decorate([decorator1, decorator2], function foo() { return "Hello"
> }); // no hoisting!
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
