[tcgc] add @clientOption decorator
#3827
Conversation
iscai-msft
requested review from
bterlson,
joheredi,
lmazuel,
m-nash,
markcowl,
srnagar and
timotheeguerin
as code owners
microsoft-github-policy-service
bot
added
the
lib:tcgc
|
All changed packages have been documented.
Show changes
|
packages/typespec-client-generator-core/test/decorators/general-list.test.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
You can try these changes here
|
tadelesh
left a comment
tadelesh
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shall we export client option in TCGC type graph? Current way seems not very convenient for language emitter.
|
And could you merge main and migrate to use new testing framework? |
packages/typespec-client-generator-core/generated-defs/Azure.ClientGenerator.Core.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…cgc/clientOptions
commit: |
|
@tadelesh I added a new getter |
packages/typespec-client-generator-core/test/decorators/client-option.test.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| export function getClientOptions(decorators: DecoratorInfo[]): SdkClientOption[] { | ||
| return decorators | ||
| .filter((d) => d.name === CLIENT_OPTION_DECORATOR_NAME) | ||
| .map((d) => ({ | ||
| name: d.arguments.name as string, | ||
| value: d.arguments.value as Value, | ||
| scope: d.arguments.scope as string | undefined, | ||
| })); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
May be getClientOptions<T extends DecoratedType>(type: T, key): unknown is much useful?
joheredi
left a comment
joheredi
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good! My only question is process-wise, what is the expected lifecycle of an experimental decorator. Once it is validated and proven helpful do we expect the emitter to expose an actual decorator to replace the @@clientoption?
5 participants
fixes #2228