[Feat] Adding the support for setters
#94
Conversation
| todo!() | ||
| PropertyValue::Getter(_) => return Err(SetPropertyError::NotWriteable), | ||
| PropertyValue::Setter(setter) => { | ||
| // Setters must have 1 parameters, so it's supposed to be catch at parsing time |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yep! I had a thought to make it fixed in the parser with generics. But the additional complexity outweighed the benefit so it is just assumed!
|
This is a great implementation of TypeScript's behaviour for setters! Un/fortunately with Ezno we can do one better and actually evaluate the setter's side effects. Because other Ezno features rely of this behaviour existing it means that ALL side effects that can be observed, need to be. It is my fault, I was a bit rushed in June and should have added more information to the issue. I have updated the message in #39 to describe the way to do in accordance with Ezno's type system. It reuses the Might seem a bit unnecessary, but things like |
|
Hey @JulesGuesnon, apologies that there wasn't information on the issue prior to the PR. Let me know if you still want to work on this based on the new information in the issue, or want any more pointers or me to start the implementation off etc. |
|
hey @kaleidawave really sorry for the delay, the end of this year has been a lot of changes in my personal life, so I've suddenly became quite busy. |
|
Awesome, totally understand 👍 Closing this PR as I think it would be better for any second attempt to start afresh. Thanks for the attempt (and thanks for #91, have noticed the codebase feeling a lot less messy recently) |
Description
This PR tries to handles #39
It's my first time touching to checker, so not sure if what I'm doing is exactly what is expected, so feel free to tell me if I'm mistaking somewhere