Closed
Conversation
…ing (v0.5.165) Decorators were parsed into the HIR (lower_decorators in lower_types.rs, Decorator field in ir.rs) but no codegen consumer read them. Programs using @component / @log / @module compiled clean and the decorator body never executed. Added reject_decorators helper in lower_decl.rs that walks every decoration point on ast::Class (class, method, private-method, prop, private-prop, constructor param, method param) and bail!s with a message naming the decorator and linking to the limitations doc. Called from lower_class_decl and lower_class_from_ast. Same failure-mode reasoning as v0.5.119's warn→bail upgrade: silent no-ops are the worst compile outcome. Also flipped README.md's "Decorators | ✅" row to ❌ with a link to limitations.md, deleted test-files/test_decorators.ts (its header claimed "Perry implements @log" — never true), and stripped the decorator block from test-files/test_integration_app.ts. Separate followup: example-code/nestjs-typeorm relies on decorators and was never actually working — now fails loudly at compile. README row for that example is misleading and should be removed in a dedicated commit.
…s 1.6x slower (v0.5.166) baseline.json already recorded bench_json_roundtrip as Perry 591ms vs Node 375ms (~1.58x slower), but the benchmark wasn't in the README table and the "beats on every benchmark" line sat right above it. Verified by rerunning locally on v0.5.165: Perry 588ms, Node 369ms, Bun 245ms → ~1.6x slower than Node, ~2.4x slower than Bun. Also spot-checked bench_gc_pressure (the baseline's other >1.0 ratio row): Perry 16ms vs Node 20ms fresh — Perry now wins, so json_roundtrip is the sole current exception. Amended the claim to name the exception instead of softening to "the benchmarks below"; added a json_roundtrip row to the public table so the README and artifact agree. New row dated 2026-04-23 on v0.5.165; existing rows keep their 2026-04-22 on v0.5.164 footer. Filed #149 for the underlying perf work (RSS ratio suggests allocator pressure is part of the gap, not just parse throughput). No code change.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.