PromucFlow_constructor/app/client/packages/ast/index.ts

148 lines
3.3 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

import type {
ObjectExpression,
PropertyNode,
MemberExpressionData,
IdentifierInfo,
feat: Add linting error for assignment expression (#25140) ## Description This change adds a linting error for direct mutation of widget property like `Widget.property = "dsf"` and instead suggests to use setter methods. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #5822 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing - [x] Add jest tests as mentioned in the [comments](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Widget-Property-Setters-Tech-Spec-2a34730e2e6d4df8ae7637c363b1096c?pvs=4#276554d9875b42d68868aa969e9d7d03) of the tech spec document for this project. - [x] Add test to verify linting error for widget assignment - [x] Add cypress test for autocomplete of more setter methods - [x] Add cypress test for currencyInput setValue #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress #### Test Plan #### Issues raised during DP testing ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Druthi Polisetty <druthi@appsmith.com>
2023-07-24 06:53:45 +00:00
AssignmentExpressionData,
CallExpressionData,
MemberCallExpressionData,
} from "./src";
import {
isIdentifierNode,
isVariableDeclarator,
isObjectExpression,
isLiteralNode,
isPropertyNode,
isPropertyAFunctionNode,
feat: Action selector (#21582) ## Description Replaces the old boring action selector dropdown with a much more sophisticated UI that is capable of going above and beyond. Users with an aversion to code can now build their more complex workflows with a click of a few buttons. Consider this code snippet ```javascript Api1.run(() => { showAlert("Hello"); navigateTo('Page1', {}, 'SAME_WINDOW'); }, () => { removeValue("test"); }); ``` |**Old action selector** |**New action selector**| |:-:|:-:| |<img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 54 14" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228520661-a639b580-8986-4aec-a0f5-e2786d1a0f56.png">| <img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 55 15" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228521043-5025aa42-af95-4574-b586-bc4c721240bc.png">| **Click on an action block to edit its parameters.** <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 01 18" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228522479-493769d0-9d2c-4b67-b493-a79e3bb9c947.png"> **Switch to JS mode to get the raw code** <img width="273" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 05 51" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228523458-13bc0302-4c94-4176-b5aa-3ec208122f57.png"> ### Code changes **New UI components** - ActionCreator component splits the code into block statements. - Each block statement is represented by ActionTree.tsx UI component. - ActionTree.tsx represents an action and its chains. - ActionCard.tsx is the block that represents the individual action on the UI. - ActionSelector.tsx component is popover that contains the form for editing individual action. - TabView, TextView, SelectorView, ActionSelectorView and KeyValueView are components that represent configurable fields in ActionSelector form. **AST methods** - Added methods to get/set function names, expressions, arguments. - Added methods to get/set then/catch blocks to allow chaining of actions. - Added methods to check if code is convertible to UI. Fixes #10160 Fixes #21588 Fixes #21392 Fixes #21393 Fixes #7903 Fixes #15895 Fixes #17765 Fixes #14562 Depends on https://github.com/appsmithorg/design-system/pull/306 ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2296 ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [x] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [x] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [x] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Rimil Dey <rimil@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: arunvjn <arun@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi Goswami <parthvigoswami@Parthvis-MacBook-Pro.local>
2023-04-06 16:49:12 +00:00
isCallExpressionNode,
getAST,
extractIdentifierInfoFromCode,
entityRefactorFromCode,
feat: Add linting error for assignment expression (#25140) ## Description This change adds a linting error for direct mutation of widget property like `Widget.property = "dsf"` and instead suggests to use setter methods. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #5822 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing - [x] Add jest tests as mentioned in the [comments](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Widget-Property-Setters-Tech-Spec-2a34730e2e6d4df8ae7637c363b1096c?pvs=4#276554d9875b42d68868aa969e9d7d03) of the tech spec document for this project. - [x] Add test to verify linting error for widget assignment - [x] Add cypress test for autocomplete of more setter methods - [x] Add cypress test for currencyInput setValue #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress #### Test Plan #### Issues raised during DP testing ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Druthi Polisetty <druthi@appsmith.com>
2023-07-24 06:53:45 +00:00
extractExpressionsFromCode,
getFunctionalParamsFromNode,
isTypeOfFunction,
fix: show evaluated value for action selector fields (#23099) ## Description The evaluated values for text fields in action selector were not shown. This PR fixes the issue. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #12736 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [x] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [x] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-05-16 16:59:11 +00:00
isFunctionPresent,
getMemberExpressionObjectFromProperty,
} from "./src";
// constants
import { ECMA_VERSION, SourceType, NodeTypes } from "./src/constants";
// JSObjects
feat: Improve Linting performance (#23865) ## Description This PR introduces a new architecture, making evaluation and linting independent. <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-07-04 at 17 24 40" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/46670083/00b1eab9-cd79-4442-b51a-5345c2d6c4da"> In the previous architecture, one dependency graph was used to hold the relationship between entities in the application and subsequently, the "evaluation order" and "paths to lint" were generated. Although similar, the dependency graph required for evaluation and linting differ. For example, trigger fields should not depend on any other entity/entity path in the eval's dependency graph since they are not reactive. This is not the case for the linting dependency graph. ## Performance - This PR introduces "lint only" actions. These actions trigger linting, but not evaluation. For example, UPDATE_JS_ACTION_BODY_INIT (which is fired immediately after a user edits the body of a JS Object). Since linting fires without waiting for a successful update on the server, **response time decreases by 40%** (from 2s to 1.2s). - Reduction in time taken to generate paths requiring linting. <img width="715" alt="Screenshot 2023-07-04 at 18 10 52" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/46670083/d73a4bfc-de73-4fa7-bdca-af1e5d8ce8a1"> #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #23447 Fixes #23166 Fixes #24194 Fixes #23720 Fixes #23868 Fixes #21895 Latest DP: https://appsmith-r3f9e325p-get-appsmith.vercel.app/ #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23865#issuecomment-1606738633 > > #### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23865#issuecomment-1608779227 response: https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23865#issuecomment-1619677033 > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [x] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: arunvjn <arun@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Ivan Akulov <mail@iamakulov.com>
2023-07-05 13:34:03 +00:00
import type {
TParsedJSProperty,
JSPropertyPosition,
JSVarProperty,
JSFunctionProperty,
} from "./src/jsObject";
chore: Compute default value for jsaction params (#34708) ## Description This PR adds the values to jsArguments. The logic for this is - If the value is string then it is kept as is - For non-strings they are wrapped with `{{ }}` do maintain the data type integrity when evaluated. This property is currently not used anywhere in the platform and this is intended to be used by js modules to identify the default values of parameters and provide support to alter then in a UI in the app. This PR also splits `workers/Evaluation/getJSActionForEvalContext.ts` to override in the EE for modules PR for https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/4612 ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### :mag: Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/9919551354> > Commit: c6ab372477fb3fd2f1ce171729af4fa64ac2a487 > <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=9919551354&attempt=1" target="_blank">Cypress dashboard</a>. > Tags: `@tag.All` > Spec: > <hr>Sat, 13 Jul 2024 12:16:08 UTC <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> ## Communication Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change? - [ ] Yes - [ ] No <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Added support for additional node types (`RestElement`, `ObjectPattern`, `ArrayPattern`) in our AST processing. - Introduced `addPropertiesToJSObjectCode` function to enhance JavaScript object property management. - **Updates** - Enhanced `myFun2` function with new parameters and default values to improve flexibility and usage. - Improved `parseJSObject` function with additional parameters for better functionality. - **Tests** - Added a new test suite for `addPropertiesToJSObjectCode` function to ensure robust property management in JavaScript objects. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-07-15 15:31:42 +00:00
import {
parseJSObject,
isJSFunctionProperty,
addPropertiesToJSObjectCode,
} from "./src/jsObject";
feat: Action selector (#21582) ## Description Replaces the old boring action selector dropdown with a much more sophisticated UI that is capable of going above and beyond. Users with an aversion to code can now build their more complex workflows with a click of a few buttons. Consider this code snippet ```javascript Api1.run(() => { showAlert("Hello"); navigateTo('Page1', {}, 'SAME_WINDOW'); }, () => { removeValue("test"); }); ``` |**Old action selector** |**New action selector**| |:-:|:-:| |<img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 54 14" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228520661-a639b580-8986-4aec-a0f5-e2786d1a0f56.png">| <img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 55 15" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228521043-5025aa42-af95-4574-b586-bc4c721240bc.png">| **Click on an action block to edit its parameters.** <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 01 18" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228522479-493769d0-9d2c-4b67-b493-a79e3bb9c947.png"> **Switch to JS mode to get the raw code** <img width="273" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 05 51" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228523458-13bc0302-4c94-4176-b5aa-3ec208122f57.png"> ### Code changes **New UI components** - ActionCreator component splits the code into block statements. - Each block statement is represented by ActionTree.tsx UI component. - ActionTree.tsx represents an action and its chains. - ActionCard.tsx is the block that represents the individual action on the UI. - ActionSelector.tsx component is popover that contains the form for editing individual action. - TabView, TextView, SelectorView, ActionSelectorView and KeyValueView are components that represent configurable fields in ActionSelector form. **AST methods** - Added methods to get/set function names, expressions, arguments. - Added methods to get/set then/catch blocks to allow chaining of actions. - Added methods to check if code is convertible to UI. Fixes #10160 Fixes #21588 Fixes #21392 Fixes #21393 Fixes #7903 Fixes #15895 Fixes #17765 Fixes #14562 Depends on https://github.com/appsmithorg/design-system/pull/306 ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2296 ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [x] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [x] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [x] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Rimil Dey <rimil@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: arunvjn <arun@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi Goswami <parthvigoswami@Parthvis-MacBook-Pro.local>
2023-04-06 16:49:12 +00:00
// action creator
import {
getTextArgumentAtPosition,
setTextArgumentAtPosition,
getEnumArgumentAtPosition,
setEnumArgumentAtPosition,
getModalName,
setModalName,
getFuncExpressionAtPosition,
getFunction,
replaceActionInQuery,
setCallbackFunctionField,
getActionBlocks,
getFunctionBodyStatements,
getMainAction,
getFunctionName,
setObjectAtPosition,
getThenCatchBlocksFromQuery,
setThenBlockInQuery,
setCatchBlockInQuery,
getFunctionArguments,
getFunctionNameFromJsObjectExpression,
getCallExpressions,
canTranslateToUI,
getFunctionParams,
getQueryParam,
setQueryParam,
checkIfCatchBlockExists,
checkIfThenBlockExists,
checkIfArgumentExistAtPosition,
} from "./src/actionCreator";
feat: peek overlay nested properties + perf improvements (#23414) Fixes #23057 Fixes #23054 ## Description TL;DR Added support for peeking on nested properties. e.g. `Api1.data[0].id`. This won't work when: - local variables are involved in the expression. e.g. `Api1.data[x].id` won't support peeking at the variable `[x]` or anything after that. - library code is involved e.g. `moment`, `_` etc... - when functions are called. e.g. Api1.data[0].id.toFixed() Because these cases requires evaluation. <img width="355" alt="image" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/66776129/d09d1f0d-1692-46f5-8ec1-592f4fe75f7a"> #### Media (old vs new) https://www.loom.com/share/dedcf113439c4ee2a19028acca54045e ## Performance improvements: - Use AST to identify expressions instead marking text manually. - This reduces the number of markers we process (~ half). - Before ![image](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/66776129/bb16ac6b-46dd-4e39-8524-e4f4fa2c3243) - After ![image](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/66776129/28f0f209-5437-4718-a74a-f025c576afda) - AST logs https://www.loom.com/share/ddde93233cc8470ea04309d8a8332240 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Jest - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2402 #### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23414#issuecomment-1553164908 ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [x] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [x] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [x] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-05-26 11:42:10 +00:00
// peekOverlay
import type { PeekOverlayExpressionIdentifierOptions } from "./src/peekOverlay";
import { PeekOverlayExpressionIdentifier } from "./src/peekOverlay";
feat: Action selector (#21582) ## Description Replaces the old boring action selector dropdown with a much more sophisticated UI that is capable of going above and beyond. Users with an aversion to code can now build their more complex workflows with a click of a few buttons. Consider this code snippet ```javascript Api1.run(() => { showAlert("Hello"); navigateTo('Page1', {}, 'SAME_WINDOW'); }, () => { removeValue("test"); }); ``` |**Old action selector** |**New action selector**| |:-:|:-:| |<img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 54 14" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228520661-a639b580-8986-4aec-a0f5-e2786d1a0f56.png">| <img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 55 15" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228521043-5025aa42-af95-4574-b586-bc4c721240bc.png">| **Click on an action block to edit its parameters.** <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 01 18" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228522479-493769d0-9d2c-4b67-b493-a79e3bb9c947.png"> **Switch to JS mode to get the raw code** <img width="273" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 05 51" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228523458-13bc0302-4c94-4176-b5aa-3ec208122f57.png"> ### Code changes **New UI components** - ActionCreator component splits the code into block statements. - Each block statement is represented by ActionTree.tsx UI component. - ActionTree.tsx represents an action and its chains. - ActionCard.tsx is the block that represents the individual action on the UI. - ActionSelector.tsx component is popover that contains the form for editing individual action. - TabView, TextView, SelectorView, ActionSelectorView and KeyValueView are components that represent configurable fields in ActionSelector form. **AST methods** - Added methods to get/set function names, expressions, arguments. - Added methods to get/set then/catch blocks to allow chaining of actions. - Added methods to check if code is convertible to UI. Fixes #10160 Fixes #21588 Fixes #21392 Fixes #21393 Fixes #7903 Fixes #15895 Fixes #17765 Fixes #14562 Depends on https://github.com/appsmithorg/design-system/pull/306 ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2296 ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [x] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [x] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [x] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Rimil Dey <rimil@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: arunvjn <arun@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi Goswami <parthvigoswami@Parthvis-MacBook-Pro.local>
2023-04-06 16:49:12 +00:00
// types or interfaces should be exported with type keyword, while enums can be exported like normal functions
export type {
ObjectExpression,
PropertyNode,
MemberExpressionData,
IdentifierInfo,
feat: show lint errors in async functions bound to sync fields (#21187) ## Description This PR improves the error resolution journey for users. Lint warnings are added to async JS functions which are bound to data fields (sync fields). - JSObjects are "linted" by individual properties (as opposed to being "linted" as a whole) - Only edited jsobject properties get "linted", improving jsObject linting by ~35%.(This largely depends on the size of the JSObject) <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-04-03 at 11 17 45" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46670083/229482424-233f3950-ffec-46f5-8c42-680dff6a412f.png"> <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-14 at 11 26 00" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46670083/224975572-b2d8d404-aac6-43fb-be14-20edf7c56117.png"> <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-14 at 11 41 11" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46670083/224975952-c40848b1-69d8-489d-9b62-24127ea1a2f1.png"> Fixes #20289 Fixes #20008 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## How Has This Been Tested? - CYPRESS - JEST ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test
2023-04-03 10:41:15 +00:00
TParsedJSProperty,
JSPropertyPosition,
feat: peek overlay nested properties + perf improvements (#23414) Fixes #23057 Fixes #23054 ## Description TL;DR Added support for peeking on nested properties. e.g. `Api1.data[0].id`. This won't work when: - local variables are involved in the expression. e.g. `Api1.data[x].id` won't support peeking at the variable `[x]` or anything after that. - library code is involved e.g. `moment`, `_` etc... - when functions are called. e.g. Api1.data[0].id.toFixed() Because these cases requires evaluation. <img width="355" alt="image" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/66776129/d09d1f0d-1692-46f5-8ec1-592f4fe75f7a"> #### Media (old vs new) https://www.loom.com/share/dedcf113439c4ee2a19028acca54045e ## Performance improvements: - Use AST to identify expressions instead marking text manually. - This reduces the number of markers we process (~ half). - Before ![image](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/66776129/bb16ac6b-46dd-4e39-8524-e4f4fa2c3243) - After ![image](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/66776129/28f0f209-5437-4718-a74a-f025c576afda) - AST logs https://www.loom.com/share/ddde93233cc8470ea04309d8a8332240 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Jest - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2402 #### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23414#issuecomment-1553164908 ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [x] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [x] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [x] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-05-26 11:42:10 +00:00
PeekOverlayExpressionIdentifierOptions,
feat: Add linting error for assignment expression (#25140) ## Description This change adds a linting error for direct mutation of widget property like `Widget.property = "dsf"` and instead suggests to use setter methods. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #5822 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing - [x] Add jest tests as mentioned in the [comments](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Widget-Property-Setters-Tech-Spec-2a34730e2e6d4df8ae7637c363b1096c?pvs=4#276554d9875b42d68868aa969e9d7d03) of the tech spec document for this project. - [x] Add test to verify linting error for widget assignment - [x] Add cypress test for autocomplete of more setter methods - [x] Add cypress test for currencyInput setValue #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress #### Test Plan #### Issues raised during DP testing ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Druthi Polisetty <druthi@appsmith.com>
2023-07-24 06:53:45 +00:00
AssignmentExpressionData,
feat: Improve Linting performance (#23865) ## Description This PR introduces a new architecture, making evaluation and linting independent. <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-07-04 at 17 24 40" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/46670083/00b1eab9-cd79-4442-b51a-5345c2d6c4da"> In the previous architecture, one dependency graph was used to hold the relationship between entities in the application and subsequently, the "evaluation order" and "paths to lint" were generated. Although similar, the dependency graph required for evaluation and linting differ. For example, trigger fields should not depend on any other entity/entity path in the eval's dependency graph since they are not reactive. This is not the case for the linting dependency graph. ## Performance - This PR introduces "lint only" actions. These actions trigger linting, but not evaluation. For example, UPDATE_JS_ACTION_BODY_INIT (which is fired immediately after a user edits the body of a JS Object). Since linting fires without waiting for a successful update on the server, **response time decreases by 40%** (from 2s to 1.2s). - Reduction in time taken to generate paths requiring linting. <img width="715" alt="Screenshot 2023-07-04 at 18 10 52" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/46670083/d73a4bfc-de73-4fa7-bdca-af1e5d8ce8a1"> #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #23447 Fixes #23166 Fixes #24194 Fixes #23720 Fixes #23868 Fixes #21895 Latest DP: https://appsmith-r3f9e325p-get-appsmith.vercel.app/ #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23865#issuecomment-1606738633 > > #### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23865#issuecomment-1608779227 response: https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23865#issuecomment-1619677033 > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [x] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: arunvjn <arun@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Ivan Akulov <mail@iamakulov.com>
2023-07-05 13:34:03 +00:00
JSVarProperty,
JSFunctionProperty,
CallExpressionData,
MemberCallExpressionData,
};
export {
isIdentifierNode,
isVariableDeclarator,
isObjectExpression,
isLiteralNode,
isPropertyNode,
isPropertyAFunctionNode,
feat: Action selector (#21582) ## Description Replaces the old boring action selector dropdown with a much more sophisticated UI that is capable of going above and beyond. Users with an aversion to code can now build their more complex workflows with a click of a few buttons. Consider this code snippet ```javascript Api1.run(() => { showAlert("Hello"); navigateTo('Page1', {}, 'SAME_WINDOW'); }, () => { removeValue("test"); }); ``` |**Old action selector** |**New action selector**| |:-:|:-:| |<img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 54 14" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228520661-a639b580-8986-4aec-a0f5-e2786d1a0f56.png">| <img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 55 15" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228521043-5025aa42-af95-4574-b586-bc4c721240bc.png">| **Click on an action block to edit its parameters.** <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 01 18" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228522479-493769d0-9d2c-4b67-b493-a79e3bb9c947.png"> **Switch to JS mode to get the raw code** <img width="273" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 05 51" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228523458-13bc0302-4c94-4176-b5aa-3ec208122f57.png"> ### Code changes **New UI components** - ActionCreator component splits the code into block statements. - Each block statement is represented by ActionTree.tsx UI component. - ActionTree.tsx represents an action and its chains. - ActionCard.tsx is the block that represents the individual action on the UI. - ActionSelector.tsx component is popover that contains the form for editing individual action. - TabView, TextView, SelectorView, ActionSelectorView and KeyValueView are components that represent configurable fields in ActionSelector form. **AST methods** - Added methods to get/set function names, expressions, arguments. - Added methods to get/set then/catch blocks to allow chaining of actions. - Added methods to check if code is convertible to UI. Fixes #10160 Fixes #21588 Fixes #21392 Fixes #21393 Fixes #7903 Fixes #15895 Fixes #17765 Fixes #14562 Depends on https://github.com/appsmithorg/design-system/pull/306 ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2296 ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [x] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [x] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [x] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Rimil Dey <rimil@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: arunvjn <arun@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi Goswami <parthvigoswami@Parthvis-MacBook-Pro.local>
2023-04-06 16:49:12 +00:00
isCallExpressionNode,
getAST,
extractIdentifierInfoFromCode,
entityRefactorFromCode,
feat: Add linting error for assignment expression (#25140) ## Description This change adds a linting error for direct mutation of widget property like `Widget.property = "dsf"` and instead suggests to use setter methods. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #5822 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing - [x] Add jest tests as mentioned in the [comments](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Widget-Property-Setters-Tech-Spec-2a34730e2e6d4df8ae7637c363b1096c?pvs=4#276554d9875b42d68868aa969e9d7d03) of the tech spec document for this project. - [x] Add test to verify linting error for widget assignment - [x] Add cypress test for autocomplete of more setter methods - [x] Add cypress test for currencyInput setValue #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress #### Test Plan #### Issues raised during DP testing ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Druthi Polisetty <druthi@appsmith.com>
2023-07-24 06:53:45 +00:00
extractExpressionsFromCode,
getFunctionalParamsFromNode,
isTypeOfFunction,
feat: show lint errors in async functions bound to sync fields (#21187) ## Description This PR improves the error resolution journey for users. Lint warnings are added to async JS functions which are bound to data fields (sync fields). - JSObjects are "linted" by individual properties (as opposed to being "linted" as a whole) - Only edited jsobject properties get "linted", improving jsObject linting by ~35%.(This largely depends on the size of the JSObject) <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-04-03 at 11 17 45" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46670083/229482424-233f3950-ffec-46f5-8c42-680dff6a412f.png"> <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-14 at 11 26 00" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46670083/224975572-b2d8d404-aac6-43fb-be14-20edf7c56117.png"> <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-14 at 11 41 11" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46670083/224975952-c40848b1-69d8-489d-9b62-24127ea1a2f1.png"> Fixes #20289 Fixes #20008 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## How Has This Been Tested? - CYPRESS - JEST ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test
2023-04-03 10:41:15 +00:00
parseJSObject,
ECMA_VERSION,
SourceType,
NodeTypes,
feat: Action selector (#21582) ## Description Replaces the old boring action selector dropdown with a much more sophisticated UI that is capable of going above and beyond. Users with an aversion to code can now build their more complex workflows with a click of a few buttons. Consider this code snippet ```javascript Api1.run(() => { showAlert("Hello"); navigateTo('Page1', {}, 'SAME_WINDOW'); }, () => { removeValue("test"); }); ``` |**Old action selector** |**New action selector**| |:-:|:-:| |<img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 54 14" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228520661-a639b580-8986-4aec-a0f5-e2786d1a0f56.png">| <img width="250" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 16 55 15" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228521043-5025aa42-af95-4574-b586-bc4c721240bc.png">| **Click on an action block to edit its parameters.** <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 01 18" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228522479-493769d0-9d2c-4b67-b493-a79e3bb9c947.png"> **Switch to JS mode to get the raw code** <img width="273" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-29 at 17 05 51" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/228523458-13bc0302-4c94-4176-b5aa-3ec208122f57.png"> ### Code changes **New UI components** - ActionCreator component splits the code into block statements. - Each block statement is represented by ActionTree.tsx UI component. - ActionTree.tsx represents an action and its chains. - ActionCard.tsx is the block that represents the individual action on the UI. - ActionSelector.tsx component is popover that contains the form for editing individual action. - TabView, TextView, SelectorView, ActionSelectorView and KeyValueView are components that represent configurable fields in ActionSelector form. **AST methods** - Added methods to get/set function names, expressions, arguments. - Added methods to get/set then/catch blocks to allow chaining of actions. - Added methods to check if code is convertible to UI. Fixes #10160 Fixes #21588 Fixes #21392 Fixes #21393 Fixes #7903 Fixes #15895 Fixes #17765 Fixes #14562 Depends on https://github.com/appsmithorg/design-system/pull/306 ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2296 ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [x] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [x] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [x] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Rimil Dey <rimil@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: arunvjn <arun@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi Goswami <parthvigoswami@Parthvis-MacBook-Pro.local>
2023-04-06 16:49:12 +00:00
getTextArgumentAtPosition,
getEnumArgumentAtPosition,
getModalName,
setModalName,
setTextArgumentAtPosition,
setEnumArgumentAtPosition,
getFuncExpressionAtPosition,
getFunction,
replaceActionInQuery,
setCallbackFunctionField,
getActionBlocks,
getFunctionBodyStatements,
getMainAction,
getFunctionName,
setObjectAtPosition,
getThenCatchBlocksFromQuery,
setThenBlockInQuery,
setCatchBlockInQuery,
getFunctionArguments,
getFunctionNameFromJsObjectExpression,
getCallExpressions,
canTranslateToUI,
getFunctionParams,
getQueryParam,
setQueryParam,
checkIfThenBlockExists,
checkIfCatchBlockExists,
checkIfArgumentExistAtPosition,
feat: show lint errors in async functions bound to sync fields (#21187) ## Description This PR improves the error resolution journey for users. Lint warnings are added to async JS functions which are bound to data fields (sync fields). - JSObjects are "linted" by individual properties (as opposed to being "linted" as a whole) - Only edited jsobject properties get "linted", improving jsObject linting by ~35%.(This largely depends on the size of the JSObject) <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-04-03 at 11 17 45" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46670083/229482424-233f3950-ffec-46f5-8c42-680dff6a412f.png"> <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-14 at 11 26 00" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46670083/224975572-b2d8d404-aac6-43fb-be14-20edf7c56117.png"> <img width="500" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-14 at 11 41 11" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46670083/224975952-c40848b1-69d8-489d-9b62-24127ea1a2f1.png"> Fixes #20289 Fixes #20008 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## How Has This Been Tested? - CYPRESS - JEST ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test
2023-04-03 10:41:15 +00:00
isJSFunctionProperty,
fix: show evaluated value for action selector fields (#23099) ## Description The evaluated values for text fields in action selector were not shown. This PR fixes the issue. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #12736 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [x] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [x] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-05-16 16:59:11 +00:00
isFunctionPresent,
feat: peek overlay nested properties + perf improvements (#23414) Fixes #23057 Fixes #23054 ## Description TL;DR Added support for peeking on nested properties. e.g. `Api1.data[0].id`. This won't work when: - local variables are involved in the expression. e.g. `Api1.data[x].id` won't support peeking at the variable `[x]` or anything after that. - library code is involved e.g. `moment`, `_` etc... - when functions are called. e.g. Api1.data[0].id.toFixed() Because these cases requires evaluation. <img width="355" alt="image" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/66776129/d09d1f0d-1692-46f5-8ec1-592f4fe75f7a"> #### Media (old vs new) https://www.loom.com/share/dedcf113439c4ee2a19028acca54045e ## Performance improvements: - Use AST to identify expressions instead marking text manually. - This reduces the number of markers we process (~ half). - Before ![image](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/66776129/bb16ac6b-46dd-4e39-8524-e4f4fa2c3243) - After ![image](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/66776129/28f0f209-5437-4718-a74a-f025c576afda) - AST logs https://www.loom.com/share/ddde93233cc8470ea04309d8a8332240 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Jest - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2402 #### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23414#issuecomment-1553164908 ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [x] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [x] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [x] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-05-26 11:42:10 +00:00
PeekOverlayExpressionIdentifier,
getMemberExpressionObjectFromProperty,
chore: Compute default value for jsaction params (#34708) ## Description This PR adds the values to jsArguments. The logic for this is - If the value is string then it is kept as is - For non-strings they are wrapped with `{{ }}` do maintain the data type integrity when evaluated. This property is currently not used anywhere in the platform and this is intended to be used by js modules to identify the default values of parameters and provide support to alter then in a UI in the app. This PR also splits `workers/Evaluation/getJSActionForEvalContext.ts` to override in the EE for modules PR for https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/4612 ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### :mag: Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/9919551354> > Commit: c6ab372477fb3fd2f1ce171729af4fa64ac2a487 > <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=9919551354&attempt=1" target="_blank">Cypress dashboard</a>. > Tags: `@tag.All` > Spec: > <hr>Sat, 13 Jul 2024 12:16:08 UTC <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> ## Communication Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change? - [ ] Yes - [ ] No <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Added support for additional node types (`RestElement`, `ObjectPattern`, `ArrayPattern`) in our AST processing. - Introduced `addPropertiesToJSObjectCode` function to enhance JavaScript object property management. - **Updates** - Enhanced `myFun2` function with new parameters and default values to improve flexibility and usage. - Improved `parseJSObject` function with additional parameters for better functionality. - **Tests** - Added a new test suite for `addPropertiesToJSObjectCode` function to ensure robust property management in JavaScript objects. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-07-15 15:31:42 +00:00
addPropertiesToJSObjectCode,
};