local @classes

[Wes0617]

Hello, I would like like to have...

---@local-class MyClass
local MyClass = {}

...for classes whose usage is limited to the individual file. The only difference with ---@class is that the class will be visible only to that particular file rather than globally. For example, stubs and fake classes for unit testing that don't have any other use except testing.

Local classes can extend global classes, but global classes cannot extend local classes.

Thanks!

[ChrisKader]

I like this but would prefer something like

---@class (local) MyClass
local MyClass = {}

That way it would be pretty much the same syntax and could even be used with something like:

---@class (local, exact) MyClass
local MyClass = {}

[magneto538]

Yes please!

[CppCXY]

People usually need classes that are visible within a certain scope, rather than classes that are only visible in local files. I think restricting the namespace might be better.

[ChrisKader]

This would probably fall under the over arching suggestion of having type intelligent function environments.

[CppCXY]

Considering this: If types are support locally visible, then when I return such an object, will its fields be visible externally? If the type is locally visible, does it mean I can define the same name for completely different classes in different files? To achieve this, type references will become complex and consume more memory.