docs(hier-dep-inj): fix comp name, spelling in field name, copyedits #3335
Conversation
| :marked | ||
| By providing `VillainsService` in the `VillainsListComponent` metadata — and nowhere else —, | ||
| By providing `VillainsService` in the `VillainsListComponent` metadata — and nowhere else — |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The comma was correct but ugly. Please rephrase:
By providing
VillainsServicein theVillainsListComponentmetadata and nowhere else,
| get taxReturn(): HeroTaxReturn { | ||
| return this.heroTaxReturnService.taxReturn; | ||
| } | ||
| @Input() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why did you move this here? I realize it is technically true that the @Input applies to the setter but does it looks awful and it doesn't change Angular's behavior, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As a matter of style, we should encourage readers to associate @Input with setters. This way, documentation and refactoring tools, for example, will attribute the decorator to the proper class member.
Right, Angular's behavior isn't affected (though IMHO it might be incidental behavior that it happens to work when attached to the getter).
If you feel strongly about it, I can undo it. Let me know.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't feel strongly about it ... yet.
If we really believe that @Input should adorn the setter, we should find a place in the docs to say that and say why. If you have a moment to look for that place and propose language for it, I'd be grateful.
That would be a separate PR. I'm merging this one.
- `villaines` --> `villains` - `TaxReturnComponent` --> `HeroTaxReturnComponent` - Moved `@Input()` to be on setter rather than getter. - Other misc copyedits
chalin
force-pushed
the
chalin-hier-dep-inj-copyedits-0302
branch
from
ee4e065 to
a5f846e
Compare
@Input()to be on setter rather than getter.villaines-->villainsTaxReturnComponent-->HeroTaxReturnComponent