Skip to content

fix(es/decorators): decorator private prop init #10396

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

@mantou132 mantou132 requested a review from a team as a code owner April 20, 2025 16:12
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Apr 20, 2025

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: f05221d

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLA assistant check
Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.

Copy link
Member

@kdy1 kdy1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you! Can you add some tests?

@kdy1 kdy1 added this to the Planned milestone Apr 20, 2025
@kdy1 kdy1 self-assigned this Apr 20, 2025
@mantou132 mantou132 changed the title feat(es/decorators): decorator support private field feat(es/decorators): decorator support private prop Apr 21, 2025
@mantou132 mantou132 requested a review from a team as a code owner April 21, 2025 15:25
@mantou132 mantou132 changed the title feat(es/decorators): decorator support private prop fix(es/decorators): decorator private prop init Apr 21, 2025
@mantou132
Copy link
Author

Updated tests.

@logMethodDecoratorRun(6, 15, 27, 37)
@logMethodDecoratorRun(7, 14, 26, 36)
#c() {};
@logMethodDecoratorRun(6, 15, 37, 31)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this change correct?
Is this change related to #7404?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

irrelevant

This is still incorrect. This PR adjusts the order, but at least it prevents the issue where the decorator initializer does not execute when only fields are present.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Then why does this PR modify the execution tests copied from Babel?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants