Expose findbabelrc method #7259
Conversation
rajasekarm
commented
Jan 23, 2018
rajasekarm
commented
| Q | A |
|---|---|
| Fixed Issues? | |
| Patch: Bug Fix? | |
| Major: Breaking Change? | |
| Minor: New Feature? | |
| Tests Added + Pass? | |
| Documentation PR | |
| Any Dependency Changes? | |
| License | MIT |
|
Im all in for this change - it would be good though to document why this is needed. Most times finding this should be left to babel |
|
Build successful! You can test your changes in the REPL here: https://babeljs.io/repl/build/6837/ |
|
I think that we should expose a method which loads the config (merges the applicable |
| @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ export function findBabelrc( | |||
| filepath: string, | |||
| envName: string, | |||
| ): ConfigFile | null { | |||
| const dirname = path.dirname(filepath); | |||
| const dirname = filepath ? path.dirname(filepath) : process.cwd(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We could also consider changing this function to accept a dirname as the argument. Then you can call
findBabelrc(process.cwd(), "");
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One concern I have about exposing this is that we probably want to change the signature of this function more in the future, and it will be easy to miss that we're breaking a public API. I'm wondering if it would be better to make a new function right in src/index.js that calls through to this. For instance we may add flags to tell a the .babelrc.js file whether Babel allows a promise to be returned, and we'll probably add another parameter for passing a root folder to stop searching at.
Yeah, this seems more useful :) still I'd like to discuss exact use cases (we could even list them in the docs and advise people not to use it for regular use cases) |
|
I'm going to close this for now since I don't think it's what we want, but I do think exposing something will be good, and we can continue this discussion in Slack. |
lock
bot
added
the
outdated
