CHANGE @W-19688830@ Updated node dependencies #374
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -9,11 +9,11 @@ import globals from "globals"; | |
|
|
||
| export class BaseConfigFactory { | ||
| private readonly engineConfig: ESLintEngineConfig; | ||
|
|
||
| constructor(engineConfig: ESLintEngineConfig) { | ||
| this.engineConfig = engineConfig; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| createBaseConfigArray(): Linter.Config[] { | ||
| const configArray: Linter.Config[] = [{ | ||
| linterOptions: { | ||
|
|
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ export class BaseConfigFactory { | |
| "$Label": "readonly", // ^ | ||
| "$Locale": "readonly", // ^ | ||
| "$Resource": "readonly", // ^ | ||
|
|
||
| // ESLint doesn't natively know about various browser and node globals. So we add them here to | ||
| // remove false positives for our users. | ||
| ... globals.node, | ||
|
|
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ export class BaseConfigFactory { | |
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }]; | ||
|
|
||
| if (this.useJsBaseConfig() && this.useLwcBaseConfig()) { | ||
| configArray.push(...this.createJavascriptPlusLwcConfigArray()); | ||
| } else if (this.useJsBaseConfig()) { | ||
|
|
@@ -56,22 +56,22 @@ export class BaseConfigFactory { | |
| } | ||
| return configArray; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private createJavascriptPlusLwcConfigArray(): Linter.Config[] { | ||
| let configs: Linter.Config[] = validateAndGetRawLwcConfigArray(); | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO: Remove the For the following 2 updates when https://github.com/salesforce/eslint-config-lwc/issues/158 is fixed | ||
|
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. @jfeingold35 is turning this off still necessary? It looks like the original bug was turned off (not sure if this eslint plugin still needs to update or if that og bug being fixed is sufficient)
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. The Issue is still open, so I think it might still be necessary. |
||
| // 1) Turn off the babel parser's configFile option from the lwc base plugin | ||
| (configs[0].languageOptions!.parserOptions as Linter.ParserOptions).babelOptions.configFile = false; | ||
| // 2) For some reason babel doesn't like .cjs files unless we explicitly set this to undefined because I think | ||
| // ESLint 9 is setting it to "commonjs" automatically when the field doesn't exist in the parserOptions (and for | ||
| // babel "commonjs" isn't a valid option) | ||
| (configs[0].languageOptions!.parserOptions as Linter.ParserOptions).sourceType = undefined; | ||
|
|
||
| // Swap out eslintJs.configs.recommended with eslintJs.configs.all | ||
| configs[1] = eslintJs.configs.all; | ||
|
|
||
| // This one rule makes eslint throw an exception if the user doesn't have jest installed (which should be | ||
| // optional), so we turn it off for now. See https://github.com/salesforce/eslint-config-lwc/issues/161 | ||
| configs[3].rules = { | ||
| ...configs[3].rules, | ||
|
|
@@ -84,41 +84,41 @@ export class BaseConfigFactory { | |
| ...configs[5].rules, | ||
| '@lwc/lwc-platform/valid-offline-wire': 'off' | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Restrict these configs to just javascript files | ||
| configs = configs.map(config => { | ||
| return { | ||
| ...config, | ||
| files: this.engineConfig.file_extensions.javascript.map(ext => `**/*${ext}`) | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| return configs; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private createLwcConfigArray(): Linter.Config[] { | ||
| const configs: Linter.Config[] = this.createJavascriptPlusLwcConfigArray(); | ||
|
|
||
| // Remove any explicitly listed rule that is a base javascript rule from the recommended LWC/Lightning rules. | ||
| // Note the modified base rules don't have namespace like jest/*, @lwc/*, etc (and thus has no '/'). | ||
| configs[4].rules = Object.fromEntries( | ||
| Object.entries(configs[4].rules as Linter.RulesRecord).filter(([key]) => key.includes('/')) | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| // Remove the eslintJs.configs.all (at element 1). Note that this delete is after the configs[4] update above so | ||
| // we can work with the original index [4] instead of [3] to avoid confusion. | ||
| configs.splice(1, 1); | ||
|
|
||
| return configs; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private createJavascriptConfigArray(): Linter.Config[] { | ||
| return [{ | ||
| ... eslintJs.configs.all, | ||
| files: this.engineConfig.file_extensions.javascript.map(ext => `**/*${ext}`) | ||
| }]; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private createSldsHTMLConfigArray(): Linter.Config[] { | ||
| return sldsEslintPlugin.configs['flat/recommended-html'].map((htmlConfig: Linter.Config) => { | ||
| return { | ||
|
|
@@ -127,16 +127,16 @@ export class BaseConfigFactory { | |
| }; | ||
| }); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private createSldsCSSConfigArray(): Linter.Config[] { | ||
| return sldsEslintPlugin.configs['flat/recommended-css'].map((cssConfig: Linter.Config) => { | ||
| return { | ||
| ...cssConfig, | ||
| files: this.engineConfig.file_extensions.css.map(ext => `**/*${ext}`) | ||
| }; | ||
| }); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private createTypescriptConfigArray(): Linter.Config[] { | ||
| const configs: Linter.Config[] = []; | ||
| for (const conf of ([eslintJs.configs.all, ...eslintTs.configs.all] as Linter.Config[])) { | ||
|
|
@@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ export class BaseConfigFactory { | |
| ... (conf.languageOptions ?? {}), | ||
| parserOptions: { | ||
| ... (conf.languageOptions?.parserOptions ?? {}), | ||
|
|
||
| // Finds the tsconfig.json file nearest to each source file. This should work for most users. | ||
| // If not, then we may consider letting user specify this via config or alternatively users can | ||
| // just set disable_typescript_base_config=true and configure typescript in their own eslint | ||
|
|
@@ -159,23 +159,23 @@ export class BaseConfigFactory { | |
| } | ||
| return configs; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private useJsBaseConfig(): boolean { | ||
| return !this.engineConfig.disable_javascript_base_config && this.engineConfig.file_extensions.javascript.length > 0; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private useLwcBaseConfig(): boolean { | ||
| return !this.engineConfig.disable_lwc_base_config && this.engineConfig.file_extensions.javascript.length > 0; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private useSldsCSSBaseConfig(): boolean { | ||
| return !this.engineConfig.disable_slds_base_config && this.engineConfig.file_extensions.css.length > 0; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private useSldsHTMLBaseConfig(): boolean { | ||
| return !this.engineConfig.disable_slds_base_config && this.engineConfig.file_extensions.html.length > 0; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private useTsBaseConfig(): boolean { | ||
| return !this.engineConfig.disable_typescript_base_config && this.engineConfig.file_extensions.typescript.length > 0; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
@@ -206,13 +206,13 @@ function validateAndGetRawLwcConfigArray(): Linter.Config[] { | |
| // - and lib/configs/recommended.js of https://www.npmjs.com/package/@lwc/eslint-plugin-lwc-platform?activeTab=code | ||
| throw new Error("INTERNAL ERROR: The recommended config for @salesforce/eslint-config-lwc or @lwc/eslint-plugin-lwc-platform must have changed."); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Return a shallow copy since we will be making modifications | ||
| return rawLwcConfigs.map(config => { return {... config}}); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| function containsBabelOptions(config: Linter.Config): boolean { | ||
| return (config.languageOptions?.parserOptions as Linter.ParserOptions)?.babelOptions !== undefined; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| function hasRule(config: Linter.Config, ruleName: string): boolean { | ||
|
|
||
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've gone back and forth on this and researched it to death without getting a great answer... should we be updating @types/node if we want to ensure support of node 20?
We probably can I don't know if there are any risks here - which is why I've kept these at 20.0.0 for a while. It also helps us not accidentally rely on a node type that is a later version I believe. Since core modules are imported by clients... we wouldn't want a client being prevented from compiling because it compiles using node 20. But maybe @types/node has versioned types?