(types/fix): explicit Rollup typing, fix treeshake location #371
Conversation
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
- treeshake was in output, but it's not a config of output :/ :/ :/ - once explicit types were added, this was a big red underline :/ :/
|
nice catch - who woulda thought that typechecking is useful for this stuff 😂 wanna make sure jared sees this so not clicking merge |
swyxio
approved these changes
Dec 14, 2019
jaredpalmer
approved these changes
Dec 19, 2019
This was referenced Jan 30, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Yeaaaaaaaaa so that's kind of a problem 😕 😕 😕 Related to #365 and potentially related to #171. This bug has been around for a long enough time that it's fix may cause some breakage, idk.
Related: Does the
eslintconfig error on getters and setters? That wouldn't help with imported code, but would at least reduce unexpected errors in one's own codebase.Also should we add some regression tests for treeshaking? It's typed correctly now, but might make sense to have a test for something like this that could be considered critical and hard to catch, idk.
I was going around adding types to builder code during #367 because type-checking would add a lot more confidence and discovered this along the way -- figured it should be extracted out as its own commit.