Add support for decorators

[kripod]

Note from maintainers

For people coming to this thread later—if you use MobX or a similar library, you don’t need decorators. They are just syntax sugar in this case.
Learn more: #214 (comment), #411 (comment).
Here is why we don’t include them: #411 (comment).

The lack of decorators is currently the only thing which makes me feel uncomfortable to use this project for a MobX-based frontend.

[gaearon]

We will add them when Babel supports them out of the box. The proposal is being updated (has it already been?) and we don't want users to suffer through a breakage caused by this.

IIRC MobX should work fine without decorators. It's just a little bit more verbose.

[lacker]

I would like decorators but I agree with @gaearon . It would be nice to have decorators in React Native too. Decorators are currently at "stage 1" in the ecmascript-standardization process, and it isn't until "stage 3" that all the syntax and semantics are complete, so I think it makes sense to wait. https://github.com/tc39/proposals

[mxstbr]

Since this seems like a consensus I'll close this. Thanks for kicking off the discussion @kripod!

[kripod]

I know that it may be against the philosophy of the project, but how about adding an opt-in .reactapp.json file which would allow advanced overrides to be made? The overrided configuration should be merged with the original, keeping the features specified by any of the configurations.

Example:

"overrides": {
  "babel": {
    "plugins": ["babel-plugin-transform-decorators-legacy"]
  },
  "eslint": {
    "extends": "airbnb"
  }
}

[gaearon]

Sorry, we don't currently plan to support overrides like this. This makes it very hard for us to change the underlying settings and tools. You might have better luck with some of the alternatives listed in README!

[gaearon]

For people coming to this thread later—if you use MobX or a similar library, you don’t need decorators. They are just syntax sugar in this case.

Learn more: #214 (comment), #411 (comment).

[calebmer]

Decorators are now not a legacy transform (see babel-plugin-transform-decorators) and is a part of babel-preset-stage-2. Now may decorators be added?

[wilzbach]

@gaearon on a different issue you wrote

We’re happy to support decorators after the spec advances, and they are officially supported in Babel without the -legacy plugin.

Isn't this the case now? Is adding support for decorators now on your agenda?

[gaearon]

I'd be comfortable including them once they reach Stage 3. Treating them differently from Class Properties for reasons explained earlier: we dogfood Class Properties and will release a mod if they change.

[henryzp]

@kripod , it support reactapp.json to overrides config now??

[konradreiche]

They are just syntax sugar in this case.

It's almost never just syntax sugar. Syntax can help to inherently reduce the complexity of a program. Reading a program, writing it, understanding it. All of these tasks can be improved in many ways with the right syntax not only reducing errors but also increasing pace.

[audiolion]

@gaearon babel seems to now be off the -legacy plugin for 7.0 https://github.com/babel/babel/tree/7.0/packages/babel-plugin-transform-decorators