Multiple variable definitions with only one var statement causes all but first var to be defined in _global_

twobob / jsdoc-toolkit

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/jsdoc-toolkit

0 stars 0 forks source link

Multiple variable definitions with only one var statement causes all but first var to be defined in _global_ #314

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

It seems that, when defining variables with only one var statement (see 
attachment), variables defined after the initial comma (whether on the same 
line or lines after) are not considered to belong to the Object they were 
created in but rather the _global_ Object.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
One could expect to see all of the variables to be seen as inner fields of the 
"blah" object. In the documentation for the script that is attached, "that" is 
defined as a private inner field but all other variables are generated as 
_global_ fields.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
Jsdoc Toolkit 2.3.2, Mac OSX

Original issue reported on code.google.com by collin.b...@gmail.com on 13 Jan 2011 at 11:56

Attachments:

jsdoc-example.js

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

I can confirm this bug still exists in version 2.4.0 on OS X.

Original comment by ish...@gmail.com on 25 Mar 2011 at 4:09

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

This missing feature is a known limitation of JsDoc Toolkit, and would be 
extremely difficult to add. JSDoc 3 however will be able to handle this case 
very easily.

You can work around the issue by using @name tags.

Original comment by micmath on 25 Mar 2011 at 11:11

Changed state: WontFix

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

and when JSDOC 3 release is due? (as this "limitation" as you named it requires 
many unconvenient and in other case not necessary comments)

Original comment by mocca.pl...@gmail.com on 4 Aug 2011 at 2:09

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

Oh my God. Have I caused you an "unconvenience"? Instead of complaining about 
how the FREE and open source software I made for you isn't exactly what you 
want, why don't you contribute by submitting a patch? I've been working on 
version 3 by myself for over a year now. If that's not fast enough for you I 
urge you to use a different documentation tool, one that will allow you to 
write less "not necessary comments."

Original comment by micmath on 4 Aug 2011 at 3:14