Conversation
|
@valscion Ready for review |
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #710 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 70.35% 71.60% +1.25%
==========================================
Files 17 17
Lines 914 979 +65
Branches 308 357 +49
==========================================
+ Hits 643 701 +58
- Misses 238 242 +4
- Partials 33 36 +3 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
coverage is less due more lines with types, I will increase it when we will work on tests refactor |
valscion
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me! I see there's some added strictness to module parsing and ones which could indeed fix the strange failed to parse bundles errors some people have been seeing.
I'm all +1 on adding this type coverage. It has been an area which has been lacking in this repository and I'm thrilled to see you working on this.
Thanks for all the refactor PRs! It's making this repository so much better to work with.
And thanks for the next steps list as well!
| // I believe in a bright future of ECMAScript! | ||
| // Actually, it's set to `2050` to support the latest ECMAScript version that currently exists. | ||
| // Seems like `acorn` supports such weird option value. | ||
| ecmaVersion: 2050, | ||
| ecmaVersion: "latest", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Way better this way, assuming acorn indeed supports ecmaVersion: "latest" like this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@valscion We have types and the valid value is "latest", acorn supports this value, otherwise we will get types error on lin:types step
Summary
Here:
typescriptand jsdocs, now refactor and changes will be more easy and reduce count of bugsTypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'filter')when passing stats object #669 most likely fixed here, I didn't close it because ideally we need to add tests, I will do it in separate PRAdditional, our next steps:
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
refactor/feat
Did you add tests for your changes?
Existing
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No
If relevant, what needs to be documented once your changes are merged or what have you already documented?
Nothing