Added tags for props to serialization (including ParserOption to enable) #328
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@pvasek sorry for the delay.
I've updated the PR to 1.21.0, added the union test for the PR and added test functionality to check prop tags in testUtils.ts.
I've also made an additional change in src/parser.ts:
Only if the added ParserOption shouldIncludePropTagMap is true, instead of jsDocComment.fullComment (default), jsDocComment.description is used as prop description. This will return the plain property description without any tags while tags are served separately. Default behavior (shouldIncludePropTagMap is false or undefined) is unchanged.
I think that would also be an option for default behavior (if so the additional ParserOption would be obsolete). Currently property tags are included in the description as string:
`
/** prop2 description
*/
prop2: string;
==> output default/currently:
result[0].props.prop2.description => "prop2 description\n@internal some internal prop\n@kind category 1"
==> output (shouldIncludePropTagMap===true ):
result[0].props.prop2.description => "prop2 description"
result[0].props.prop2.tags => {internal: "some internal prop", .... }
`
I hope the PR is acceptable now, otherwise please let me know.