Skip to content
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

refactor(language-core): remove experimentalAdditionalLanguageModules and deprecated APIs #3907

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 28, 2024

Conversation

johnsoncodehk
Copy link
Member

@johnsoncodehk johnsoncodehk commented Feb 28, 2024

Changes

  • Remove deprecated createLanguages API
  • createVueLanguage API rename to createVueLanguagePlugin
  • No longer support for experimentalAdditionalLanguageModules, alternatives will be provided (probably after v2 is released)

@johnsoncodehk johnsoncodehk merged commit 5df8fef into master Feb 28, 2024
6 checks passed
Comment on lines +54 to +58
"experimentalAdditionalLanguageModules": {
"deprecated": true,
"type": "array",
"markdownDescription": "https://github.com/vuejs/language-tools/pull/2267"
},
Copy link
Collaborator

@rchl rchl Feb 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If it's removed then the property should be removed instead of marked as deprecated IMO.

If the idea is that the link provides some info about removal then it's a wrong link.

Copy link
Member Author

@johnsoncodehk johnsoncodehk Feb 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The purpose of marking it as deprecated is to be able to prompt warnings. I would remove the description, but I agree it would be better to have a deprecated message.

image

Copy link
Collaborator

@rchl rchl Feb 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've assumed that the schema uses "additionalProperties": false so that the removal would raise and error. But I see that it's not the case. I think that adding it would make sense so that this could be removed and also people would see issues if they mistype some option.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I couldn't get "additionalProperties": false to work, please feel free to open a PR if you get it to work.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

additionalProperties might not work if there are multiple schemas extending the same object but then my question is: do deprecated properties really need to be separated into its own file? If they wouldn't then it would be easy to use additionalProperties: false.

BTW. deprecated is not a meant to be used for functionality that is removed but only for that that is still supported but discouraged. With additionalProperties:false we could express both removed and deprecated properties.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can confirm this works and implement by 777b0a1, thanks!

@johnsoncodehk johnsoncodehk deleted the core-apis-update branch February 28, 2024 10:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants