Improve the JavaScript extensions docs.
Review Request #13018 — Created May 9, 2023 and submitted
This improves the JavaScript extensions docs, mostly by modernizing the
JavaScript code in the examples and fixing up some typos.
Built the docs.
Summary | ID |
---|---|
e043fe58c0f46653fc56a23d762e083879d34e6e |
Description | From | Last Updated |
---|---|---|
To keep this is internal to the module, we'll want to use const here. This applies to the other examples … |
chipx86 | |
These won't be modified, so we should use const. Also, to comply with our modern JavaScript styling, we should have … |
chipx86 | |
The old wording was incorrect. This isn't related to the Comment Dialog, but rather comment fields within the Review Dialog. |
chipx86 | |
Same note as above. |
chipx86 |
-
-
To keep this is internal to the module, we'll want to use
const
here.This applies to the other examples as well.
-
These won't be modified, so we should use
const
. Also, to comply with our modern JavaScript styling, we should have oneconst
/let
per variable. -
The old wording was incorrect. This isn't related to the Comment Dialog, but rather comment fields within the Review Dialog.
-