New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Experimental support for class fields #3139
Comments
Any updates on that? It's stage 3 now. |
Can this be reviewed, please? |
@andrewvaughan This isn't a pull request, so there's no code to review. We've been ready to accept patches for it since I opened the issue, so we don't need to revisit policy, either. All that's needed is for someone to write the code. Might that be you? |
I'd be happy to help you get your bearings, of course! |
Normally I'd be happy to contribute - but, until very recently, JSHint was still functioning in the ES6 realm, which was surpassed nearly three years ago. Given that ES7, 8 and 9 were all supported in a giant patch just a few days ago, I'm not filled with tremendous faith that the project will remain current and my work would be beneficial. If it were released more incrementally and in-line with the EMCA revisions, I'd be inclined to, but at this point, it makes more sense to strip JSHint from my project and use another linting tool in the meantime. Best of luck with the project. |
The "public class fields" proposal has been merged with one for private class fields. I've updated this feature request's title accordingly. |
Pre: Sorry to bump everyone watching this. But is there a more detailed update on this being "implemented"? This issue is looking like JSHint is tracking that a change is coming, but is there any progress on it's implementation? Even a I just want VSCode to stop yelling at me when I want to make private fields in my classes. 🥺👉👈 |
No updates. We use GitHub.com exclusively for coordination, so if there are any developments, this issue is the place to look! |
The "public class fields" proposal is currently at stage 2 in the TC39 standardization process. In accordance with our policy on new language features, we should implement support for this on an experimental basis.
Edited to add: the language proposal is now maintained as "class fields", and it has reached stage 3.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: