chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
## Description
This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import
type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export)
syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge
it easily.
As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily:
- add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and
- re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes:
https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes
This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team
members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer
conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll
merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is
merged.)
### Why is this needed?
This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3,
we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains
that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function.
However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you
this:
<img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59"
src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png">
That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it,
we need to upgrade to Prettier 2.
### Why enforce `import type`?
Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces
specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get
immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.)
I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes
refactorings easier.
Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these
imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!)
```ts
// app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts
import { Position } from "codemirror";
import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint";
import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash";
```
It’s pretty hard, right?
What about now?
```ts
// app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts
import type { Position } from "codemirror";
import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint";
import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash";
```
Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled.
This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it
_also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where
`codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from
"codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports.
This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases
type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes
the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only
imports anymore.
## Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## How Has This Been Tested?
This was tested to not break the build.
### 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
- [ ] 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
- [x] 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
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA
- [ ] 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
---------
Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com>
Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
|
|
|
import type { ControlType } from "constants/PropertyControlConstants";
|
|
|
|
|
import type {
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
ControlBuilder,
|
|
|
|
|
ControlProps,
|
|
|
|
|
ControlFunctions,
|
2021-02-16 10:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
ControlData,
|
2023-06-16 09:16:56 +00:00
|
|
|
ControlMethods,
|
2019-11-25 05:07:27 +00:00
|
|
|
} from "components/propertyControls/BaseControl";
|
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
## Description
This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import
type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export)
syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge
it easily.
As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily:
- add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and
- re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes:
https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes
This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team
members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer
conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll
merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is
merged.)
### Why is this needed?
This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3,
we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains
that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function.
However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you
this:
<img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59"
src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png">
That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it,
we need to upgrade to Prettier 2.
### Why enforce `import type`?
Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces
specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get
immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.)
I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes
refactorings easier.
Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these
imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!)
```ts
// app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts
import { Position } from "codemirror";
import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint";
import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash";
```
It’s pretty hard, right?
What about now?
```ts
// app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts
import type { Position } from "codemirror";
import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint";
import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash";
```
Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled.
This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it
_also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where
`codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from
"codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports.
This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases
type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes
the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only
imports anymore.
## Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## How Has This Been Tested?
This was tested to not break the build.
### 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
- [ ] 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
- [x] 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
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA
- [ ] 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
---------
Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com>
Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
|
|
|
import type BaseControl from "components/propertyControls/BaseControl";
|
2022-07-12 12:46:15 +00:00
|
|
|
import { isArray } from "lodash";
|
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
## Description
This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import
type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export)
syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge
it easily.
As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily:
- add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and
- re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes:
https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes
This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team
members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer
conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll
merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is
merged.)
### Why is this needed?
This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3,
we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains
that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function.
However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you
this:
<img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59"
src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png">
That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it,
we need to upgrade to Prettier 2.
### Why enforce `import type`?
Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces
specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get
immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.)
I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes
refactorings easier.
Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these
imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!)
```ts
// app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts
import { Position } from "codemirror";
import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint";
import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash";
```
It’s pretty hard, right?
What about now?
```ts
// app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts
import type { Position } from "codemirror";
import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint";
import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash";
```
Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled.
This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it
_also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where
`codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from
"codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports.
This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases
type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes
the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only
imports anymore.
## Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## How Has This Been Tested?
This was tested to not break the build.
### 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
- [ ] 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
- [x] 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
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA
- [ ] 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
---------
Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com>
Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
|
|
|
import type { AdditionalDynamicDataTree } from "./autocomplete/customTreeTypeDefCreator";
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
class PropertyControlFactory {
|
|
|
|
|
static controlMap: Map<ControlType, ControlBuilder<ControlProps>> = new Map();
|
2023-06-16 09:16:56 +00:00
|
|
|
static controlMethods: Map<ControlType, ControlMethods> = new Map();
|
2022-06-28 12:23:03 +00:00
|
|
|
static inputComputedValueMap: Map<
|
|
|
|
|
ControlType,
|
|
|
|
|
typeof BaseControl.getInputComputedValue
|
|
|
|
|
> = new Map();
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static registerControlBuilder(
|
|
|
|
|
controlType: ControlType,
|
|
|
|
|
controlBuilder: ControlBuilder<ControlProps>,
|
2023-06-16 09:16:56 +00:00
|
|
|
controlMethods: ControlMethods,
|
2022-06-28 12:23:03 +00:00
|
|
|
inputComputedValueFn: typeof BaseControl.getInputComputedValue,
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
) {
|
|
|
|
|
this.controlMap.set(controlType, controlBuilder);
|
2023-06-16 09:16:56 +00:00
|
|
|
this.controlMethods.set(controlType, controlMethods);
|
2022-06-28 12:23:03 +00:00
|
|
|
this.inputComputedValueMap.set(controlType, inputComputedValueFn);
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static createControl(
|
|
|
|
|
controlData: ControlData,
|
|
|
|
|
controlFunctions: ControlFunctions,
|
2020-02-26 12:44:56 +00:00
|
|
|
preferEditor: boolean,
|
2021-02-16 10:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
customEditor?: string,
|
2023-02-14 16:07:31 +00:00
|
|
|
additionalAutoComplete?: AdditionalDynamicDataTree,
|
2021-04-23 05:43:13 +00:00
|
|
|
hideEvaluatedValue?: boolean,
|
2023-11-14 04:33:37 +00:00
|
|
|
isSearchResult?: boolean,
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
): JSX.Element {
|
2022-05-04 09:45:57 +00:00
|
|
|
let controlBuilder;
|
2022-07-12 12:46:15 +00:00
|
|
|
let evaluatedValue = controlData.evaluatedValue;
|
2022-05-04 09:45:57 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2021-02-16 10:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
if (preferEditor) {
|
2022-05-04 09:45:57 +00:00
|
|
|
controlBuilder = customEditor
|
|
|
|
|
? this.controlMap.get(customEditor)
|
|
|
|
|
: this.controlMap.get("CODE_EDITOR");
|
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
2022-07-12 12:46:15 +00:00
|
|
|
if (customEditor === "COMPUTE_VALUE" && isArray(evaluatedValue)) {
|
|
|
|
|
evaluatedValue = evaluatedValue[0];
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2022-05-04 09:45:57 +00:00
|
|
|
controlBuilder = this.controlMap.get(controlData.controlType);
|
2021-02-16 10:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2021-05-26 12:32:43 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
if (controlBuilder) {
|
|
|
|
|
const controlProps: ControlProps = {
|
|
|
|
|
...controlData,
|
|
|
|
|
...controlFunctions,
|
2022-07-12 12:46:15 +00:00
|
|
|
evaluatedValue,
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
key: controlData.id,
|
2021-02-16 10:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
customJSControl: customEditor,
|
2021-02-19 04:49:54 +00:00
|
|
|
additionalAutoComplete,
|
2021-04-23 05:43:13 +00:00
|
|
|
hideEvaluatedValue,
|
2023-11-14 04:33:37 +00:00
|
|
|
isSearchResult,
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
2021-04-23 05:43:13 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
const control = controlBuilder.buildPropertyControl(controlProps);
|
2020-02-27 07:14:32 +00:00
|
|
|
return control;
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
|
const ex: ControlCreationException = {
|
|
|
|
|
message:
|
2019-10-21 11:40:24 +00:00
|
|
|
"Control Builder not registered for control type " +
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
controlData.controlType,
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
2020-03-06 09:45:21 +00:00
|
|
|
throw ex;
|
2019-09-18 10:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static getControlTypes(): ControlType[] {
|
|
|
|
|
return Array.from(this.controlMap.keys());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
export interface ControlCreationException {
|
|
|
|
|
message: string;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
export default PropertyControlFactory;
|