-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix: correct overeager hoisting in babel-plugin-jest-hoist
#13952
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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 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 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 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
somewhat surprised
jest.requireActual
isn't replaced with_getJestObj().requireActual
. But I guess that's not a change from this PR?I.e. question 2 from #13188. I think we should always transform, but we should not always hoist
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 think this is another imperfection introduced in #13188. The transforming code visits only
ExpressionStatement
s, but this one is aVariableDeclaration
.Even the code that looks at
ExpressionStatement
will only look at the top-most node and detect a top-leveljest.*
CallExpression
. If it's nested, like in:then the
jest.foo
call also won't be found, although the statement isExpressionStatement
.The visitor and the
extractJestObjExprIfHoistable
would need to significantly be reworked to fix all this.The source of the problem is that the original code was intended to transform only standalone statements like
or
but now #13188 greatly expanded the scope to work with all possible
jest.*
usages at all possible places, and it's far from covering all possible cases.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.
@SimenB I pushed a fix to this branch and it seems to work 🙂 Instead of visiting only
ExpressionStatement
s and searching forCallExpression
s as their immediate children, I'm visiting allCallExpression
s, and if they have ajest.*
format and are inside a hoistedjest.mock
call, I'm replacingjest
withgetJestObj()
.One case that is controversial is one where a hoistable
jest.mock
call is not an immediate child of anExpressionStatement
, but is nested somewhere inside:Should the entire
expect
statement be hoisted before therequire
?I decided to not hoist these, and hoist only call expressions that satisfy the
callExpr.parentNode.isExpressionStatement()
condition.The main reason is that allowing them to be hoisted opens a new can of worms, where one statement can contain multiple hoistable calls:
Trying to transform this code with the current plugin leads to the plugin crashing, with an infinite loop and stack overflow inside
@babel/traverse
. I didn't debug this.