search

littledan / proposal-reserved-decorator-like-syntax

Reserved decorator-like syntax as an extension point for future JavaScript syntax
23 stars 0 forks source link

Polyfilling? #2

Closed zloirock closed 5 years ago

zloirock commented 5 years ago

We can polyfill built-ins, what about built-in decorators?

Sure, some use cases of built-in decorators from this proposal can't be polyfilled. But some cases which could work as usual decorators like autobind can. New built-in decorators can be added in the future. Polyfilled built-in decorators can be used with transpilers in actual engines with transpilers. So if it's a proposal for built-ins, but not a way to add an unlimited number of new keywords, this proposal should contain a way for polyfilling at least for non-magic decorators.

littledan commented 5 years ago

I think we should think about transpilation, rather than polyfilling for built-in decorators. Things that are be done with ordinary decorators can be polyfilled. We can implement the built-in decorator syntax in Babel and let transforms do the work.

littledan commented 5 years ago

Maybe the name "built-in decorator" is confusing. Polyfilling a built-in decorator should be thought of as like polyfilling async--it just doesn't make sense.

zloirock commented 5 years ago

So, in this case, if it's just a way for adding an unlimited number of new keywords, "built-in" here confuses, because, seems, in the future, after shipping decorators proposal, usual decorators for some popular cases can be added to the standard library and in this case, they can be called built-in decorators too.

littledan commented 5 years ago

Yeah, do you have any other ideas for the name?

zloirock commented 5 years ago

I don't know. Maybe pseudo-decorators? Because some proposed features like @[resource] { /* block */ } definitely are not decorators. Need to think about options.

ljharb commented 5 years ago

maybe just “at-syntax” - that way, decorators are just one (unbracketed) form of at-syntax?

littledan commented 5 years ago

(FWIW the initial name I had was "generalized pseudo-decorators", but I thought that was too obscure.)

bathos-wistia commented 5 years ago

The word “pragma” is used several times in the readme. It seems both accurate and familiar, and it isn’t used presently in the ES spec to refer to anything else ('use strict' being a 'directive').

zloirock commented 5 years ago

Seems it can be closed.