You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently constructors (ex: something: !g.string ...) completely replace the value of the constructor so there is no way to determine what the source of the constructor is.
Looking to add in some meta information from the original sourcing of the constructor to make it easier to determine the source of the value. For example:
Also, could look into the idea of having the dev server modify the _() shortcut to output the source of the string instead of translating if a param is provided (ex: ?constructor_source=true). Then all of the source information could easily be toggled on for an entire page.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently constructors (ex:
something: !g.string ...
) completely replace the value of the constructor so there is no way to determine what the source of the constructor is.Looking to add in some meta information from the original sourcing of the constructor to make it easier to determine the source of the value. For example:
Could be accessed in the template:
Also, could look into the idea of having the dev server modify the
_()
shortcut to output the source of the string instead of translating if a param is provided (ex:?constructor_source=true
). Then all of the source information could easily be toggled on for an entire page.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: