2022-10-10
[09:03:14.0075] <rbuckton>
Decorators after export looks terrible. I'm still unhappy with that decision (or non-decision). The following is from a test for stage-3 decorators support (TypeScript needs to support both, even if we will error on decorators before in JS :

```js
// @filename: file2.ts

@dec1
@dec2
export class D {
}

@dec1
@dec2
export default class E {
}

// @filename: file3.ts

export
@dec1
@dec2
class F {
}

export default
@dec1
@dec2
class G {
}
```


2022-10-11
[18:20:55.0831] <ljharb>
that's a very subjective viewpoint that i happen to disagree with ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯ 

[00:14:30.0025] <nicolo-ribaudo>
I think this depends on whether you see `export` as part of the class declaration or not

[00:15:32.0171] <nicolo-ribaudo>
iirc TSC sees export as a modifier of the class (like abstract), but I see it as a separate thing and I would find it very confusing to not have the class immediately after the decorator

[00:16:24.0218] <nicolo-ribaudo>
* iirc TSC sees export as a modifier of the class (like abstract), but I see it as a separate thing and I would find it very confusing to not have the class immediately after the decorator

[06:18:16.0933] <pzuraq>
I also am unhappy with decorators after export, I think it'll be particularly annoying if we ever make function decorators


2022-10-19
[10:16:20.0521] <nicolo-ribaudo>
https://2ality.com/2022/10/javascript-decorators.html