Open murrayju opened 9 years ago
It says that it's suggested to use this notation for type templates be it array or any other case or meta-magic. Parsing that even for very basic cases like arrays was never supported.
Why is this closed? Are you saying that this can not possibly be implemented? This would be a very useful feature.
:+1:
I'm saying that this isn't a bug nor it is a feature that I'm going to implement on my own because of lack of the time. You are welcome to implement PR that I will gladly accept.
Reopen this issue and add a feature
tag then?
The doc says that an
Array<Type>
notation is supported for@return
(and others). In my experience, this does not generate a link to the documentation page forType
.