John,
very nice. Could you open one or three enhancement bugs for this?!
> extend : qx.blah.Object, // parent class does not exist
This should already be warned about ("Unknown symbol referenced:
qx.blah.Object..."). If not please open a bug and provide a minimal
skeleton to reproduce it.
> mmembers: { // typo on the "members"
No schema checking currently. Yes, this could be added.
> myTest.methodThatDoesNotExist(); // No such method
No class attribute checking currently. But this would be questionable, as
JS classes are "open", and attributes can be added at any time. A warning
would be in place.
NB: We had interesting feedback on warnings so far. Some people are
disturbed by them, mistaking them as errors and find it hard to judge
their relevance correctly. Others are annoyed and are not interested in
them at all. <sigh>...
> Coming from a world of JIT compilers and IDEs that do constant builds in
> the
> background to check your code and do code completion, it's another area
> where aspects of JavaScript development are like stepping back into the
> dark
> ages
That's the price you pay for working with novel technologies. And once
these mature, and environments and tools reach the level of comfort, new
things and platforms pop up, and the cycle restarts (just think of
mobile). I'm having flash-backs every other day...
> How about using the comment annotations to specify the arguments and
> return
> types and check that values are returned or add type validations during
> "source" builds?
Nice one -> bug.
T.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
_______________________________________________
qooxdoo-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
