Closed aaronadamsCA closed 2 years ago
Merging #218 (0a2d6f4) into master (f420039) will increase coverage by
0.31%
. The diff coverage is66.66%
.:exclamation: Current head 0a2d6f4 differs from pull request most recent head b96b740. Consider uploading reports for the commit b96b740 to get more accurate results
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #218 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 67.97% 68.28% +0.31%
==========================================
Files 9 9
Lines 306 309 +3
Branches 93 95 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 208 211 +3
Misses 92 92
Partials 6 6
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/config-loader.ts | 83.33% <ø> (ø) |
|
src/filesystem.ts | 73.91% <ø> (ø) |
|
src/match-path-async.ts | 69.35% <66.66%> (+1.02%) |
:arrow_up: |
src/match-path-sync.ts | 79.06% <66.66%> (+0.49%) |
:arrow_up: |
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us.
Altough I would prefer to keep webpack specific stuff in the webpack plugin, resolving nested mainfields in package.json cannot be done in the plugin so I guess we need to add this.
The jsdoc currently says this about the mainFields param:
@param mainFields A list of package.json field names to try when resolving module files.
@aaronadamsCA Could you update that comment to reflect the new function? Also the same comment is in the readme.
Altough I would prefer to keep webpack specific stuff in the webpack plugin, resolving nested mainfields in package.json cannot be done in the plugin so I guess we need to add this.
If you prefer, I can update the downstream PR instead to just throw an error if the script reaches an array. This syntax does not appear to be in wide use anymore; it seems to relate to a proposal that never went anywhere.
The jsdoc currently says this about the mainFields param:
@param mainFields A list of package.json field names to try when resolving module files.
@aaronadamsCA Could you update that comment to reflect the new function? Also the same comment is in the readme.
Done.
I think we could have this for completeness so let's merge it and then look into the downstream PR.
Released in 4.1.0
Fixes #217.
There's some slightly repetitive code, I just wasn't sure where a common function should live, so I left the minor copy-paste.