You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I know it's unreasonable to expect TypeDoc to support features of the TS beta that just released yesterday, I just wanted to put this on the radar to be sure it will be addressed when the time comes to support TS 4.3.0.
Currently, when generating documentation for a class that implements private and private static members using # syntax, the members are correctly not displayed in the documentation when excludePrivate is true in the TypeDoc config. I would expect the same for private getters and private static getters
Actual Behavior
Private getters and private static getters are output in the documentation
Steps to reproduce the bug
Generate documentation for the following code with excludePrivate set to true
I excluded most of the irrelevant members from the example code, but you can see it does contain a non-getter private member and a static non-getter private member that are correctly excluded from the generated documentation.
Environment
Typedoc version: 0.20.34
TypeScript version: 4.3.0-beta
Node.js version: 14.15.3
OS: Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS on Windows 10 x86_64
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Search terms
private getter, private static getter
Expected Behavior
I know it's unreasonable to expect TypeDoc to support features of the TS beta that just released yesterday, I just wanted to put this on the radar to be sure it will be addressed when the time comes to support TS 4.3.0.
Currently, when generating documentation for a class that implements private and private static members using
#
syntax, the members are correctly not displayed in the documentation whenexcludePrivate
istrue
in the TypeDoc config. I would expect the same for private getters and private static gettersActual Behavior
Private getters and private static getters are output in the documentation
Steps to reproduce the bug
Generate documentation for the following code with
excludePrivate
set totrue
I excluded most of the irrelevant members from the example code, but you can see it does contain a non-getter private member and a static non-getter private member that are correctly excluded from the generated documentation.
Environment
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: