On May 25, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Melkor wrote:
> > I meant it not only for the benefit of IntelliJ but for any IDE that > wants to give us intellisense. > > As we won't get special support for MochiKit, maybe there's a more > transparent way to expose function names so they can get picked up. > The > current way is dynamic and can't possibly be statically inferred. > > I don't know enough JS yet to have an answer (all the methods I'm > thinking require code generation =( ). Maybe you as experts can think > of a way. I really don't see it happening unless the IDEs get smarter. I could easily provide a list of functions and their signatures, but the IDEs would have to understand how to use such a list. You should bring this issue up with the IDE vendor(s), this isn't really a MochiKit problem. -bob --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MochiKit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mochikit -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
