Skip to content

Conversation

@flakey5
Copy link
Member

@flakey5 flakey5 commented May 31, 2025

Closes #214

TODO:

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented May 31, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 92.38402% with 307 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 81.78%. Comparing base (9285e74) to head (8ebb3d6).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/generators/json/utils/sections/method.mjs 80.50% 70 Missing ⚠️
src/generators/json/utils/sections/event.mjs 75.28% 43 Missing ⚠️
src/generators/json/utils/sections/property.mjs 77.27% 35 Missing ⚠️
src/utils/generator-error.mjs 21.05% 30 Missing ⚠️
src/generators/json-all/index.mjs 65.82% 27 Missing ⚠️
src/generators/json/utils/sections/index.mjs 78.76% 23 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
src/generators/json/index.mjs 78.00% 22 Missing ⚠️
src/generators/json/utils/parameter-tree.mjs 92.30% 13 Missing ⚠️
src/utils/assertAstType.mjs 80.00% 11 Missing ⚠️
...generators/json/utils/createParameterGroupings.mjs 91.58% 9 Missing ⚠️
... and 7 more
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #287      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   74.60%   81.78%   +7.17%     
==========================================
  Files         112      139      +27     
  Lines       10700    14729    +4029     
  Branches      722     1013     +291     
==========================================
+ Hits         7983    12046    +4063     
+ Misses       2714     2679      -35     
- Partials        3        4       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@avivkeller avivkeller mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2025
6 tasks
@avivkeller
Copy link
Member

@flakey5 is this still in progress? Need any help?

@flakey5
Copy link
Member Author

flakey5 commented Sep 30, 2025

Still in progress just haven't been committing, I do wanna get this ready for review within the next coming weeks though

@flakey5 flakey5 force-pushed the flakey5/20240909/new-json-gen branch from a4cd425 to d711fee Compare October 6, 2025 20:16
@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Oct 6, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Preview Updated (UTC)
api-docs-tooling Ready Ready Preview Nov 29, 2025 2:46am

@flakey5
Copy link
Member Author

flakey5 commented Nov 10, 2025

Bulk of this is done, with only two main things left:

  • Couple of failing tests for createParameterGroupings
  • Adding the @constructor property to class sections

I'm leaving this as a draft until those are done, but the rest is ready for review

Copy link
Member

@avivkeller avivkeller left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the rest is ready for review

I've left a first round of reviews. Thank you so much for this effort!

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need a seperate generator error?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It exists just to give the general spot in the ast that an error happens to assist with debugging, can definitely be removed if unwanted

'use strict';

// Grabs the default value if present
export const DEFAULT_EXPRESSION = /^(D|d)efault(s|):$/;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's re-use the DEFAULT_EXPRESSION constant from the legacy generator

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We can't since this is used for matching against the text in the ast which doesn't have the asterisks, while the one in the legacy generator is going off of the stringified version in textRaw which does

@flakey5
Copy link
Member Author

flakey5 commented Nov 29, 2025

Marking ready for review, should be all there minus #287 (comment)

@flakey5 flakey5 marked this pull request as ready for review November 29, 2025 02:49
@flakey5 flakey5 requested a review from a team as a code owner November 29, 2025 02:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

New JSON generator schema

4 participants