X Tutup
Skip to content

fix(compiler-cli): do not drop non-Angular decorators when downleveling #39577

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Closed
petebacondarwin wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

fix(compiler-cli): do not drop non-Angular decorators when downleveling #39577

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
19 changes: 12 additions & 7 deletions packages/compiler-cli/src/transformers/downlevel_decorators_transform.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -538,12 +538,17 @@ export function getDownlevelDecoratorsTransform(
}
newMembers.push(ts.visitEachChild(member, decoratorDownlevelVisitor, context));
}
const decorators = host.getDecoratorsOfDeclaration(classDecl) || [];

// The `ReflectionHost.getDecoratorsOfDeclaration()` method will not return certain kinds of
// decorators that will never be Angular decorators. So we cannot rely on it to capture all
// the decorators that should be kept. Instead we start off with a set of the raw decorators
// on the class, and only remove the ones that have been identified for downleveling.
const decoratorsToKeep = new Set<ts.Decorator>(classDecl.decorators);
const possibleAngularDecorators = host.getDecoratorsOfDeclaration(classDecl) || [];

let hasAngularDecorator = false;
const decoratorsToLower = [];
const decoratorsToKeep: ts.Decorator[] = [];
for (const decorator of decorators) {
for (const decorator of possibleAngularDecorators) {
// We only deal with concrete nodes in TypeScript sources, so we don't
// need to handle synthetically created decorators.
const decoratorNode = decorator.node! as ts.Decorator;
Expand All @@ -557,8 +562,7 @@ export function getDownlevelDecoratorsTransform(

if (isNgDecorator && !skipClassDecorators) {
decoratorsToLower.push(extractMetadataFromSingleDecorator(decoratorNode, diagnostics));
} else {
decoratorsToKeep.push(decoratorNode);
decoratorsToKeep.delete(decoratorNode);
}
}

Expand All @@ -581,8 +585,9 @@ export function getDownlevelDecoratorsTransform(
ts.createNodeArray(newMembers, classDecl.members.hasTrailingComma), classDecl.members);

return ts.updateClassDeclaration(
classDecl, decoratorsToKeep.length ? decoratorsToKeep : undefined, classDecl.modifiers,
classDecl.name, classDecl.typeParameters, classDecl.heritageClauses, members);
classDecl, decoratorsToKeep.size ? Array.from(decoratorsToKeep) : undefined,
classDecl.modifiers, classDecl.name, classDecl.typeParameters, classDecl.heritageClauses,
members);
}

/**
Expand Down
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletions packages/compiler-cli/test/transformers/downlevel_decorators_transform_spec.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -189,6 +189,21 @@ describe('downlevel decorator transform', () => {
expect(output).not.toContain('MyClass.decorators');
});

it('should not downlevel non-Angular class decorators generated by a builder', () => {
const {output} = transform(`
@DecoratorBuilder().customClassDecorator
export class MyClass {}
`);

expect(diagnostics.length).toBe(0);
expect(output).toContain(dedent`
MyClass = tslib_1.__decorate([
DecoratorBuilder().customClassDecorator
], MyClass);
`);
expect(output).not.toContain('MyClass.decorators');
});

it('should downlevel Angular-decorated class member', () => {
const {output} = transform(`
import {Input} from '@angular/core';
Expand Down
X Tutup