Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore: update type definitions for coverageReporters #10275

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jul 30, 2020

Conversation

not-a-doctor
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

import { Config } from '@jest/types';

const config: Config.InitialOptions = {
  coverageReporters: ['html', { subdir: 'dir' }] // typing error
}

Typing the config object as Config.InitialOptions resulted in error, because coverageReporters property in Config.InitialOptions was listed as an array of strings.

Test plan

Since there is only a change in typing precision, there is none.

@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @not-a-doctor!

Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community. We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement, and we don't seem to have you on file.

In order for us to review and merge your code, please sign at https://code.facebook.com/cla. If you are contributing on behalf of someone else (eg your employer), the individual CLA may not be sufficient and your employer may need to sign the corporate CLA.

If you have received this in error or have any questions, please contact us at cla@fb.com. Thanks!

@not-a-doctor not-a-doctor force-pushed the istanbul-reporters-typing branch 2 times, most recently from f37b3c2 to b057851 Compare July 14, 2020 16:48
@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for signing our Contributor License Agreement. We can now accept your code for this (and any) Facebook open source project. Thanks!

@@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ Indicates which provider should be used to instrument code for coverage. Allowed

Note that using `v8` is considered experimental. This uses V8's builtin code coverage rather than one based on Babel. It is not as well tested, and it has also improved in the last few releases of Node. Using the latest versions of node (v14 at the time of this writing) will yield better results.

### `coverageReporters` [array\<string | [string,any]>]
### `coverageReporters` [CoverageReporters]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This type is not defined in the docs, do you think it'll be confusing for users?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I did hesitate a bit editing this line because of the reason you've mentioned. I then searched docs and here in the file we also have a ProjectConfig type in a signature and as "projects" config field definition, although it is not "defined" itself.

Several combinations of options shape make it tedious to list and not pleasant to maintain; and [string, any] type is not quite correct as we are about to become limited to these shapes. While I decided to use the custom TS type, it still is not terrible to leave it as it were before, imo. So what do you think?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We could link to the types (code)?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks for the tip, done.

Copy link
Member

@SimenB SimenB left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you update the versioned docs as well?

docs/Configuration.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@SimenB SimenB changed the title chore: update type definitions for coverageReporters; chore: update type definitions for coverageReporters Jul 30, 2020
@SimenB SimenB merged commit e3f4f93 into jestjs:master Jul 30, 2020
@github-actions
Copy link

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.
Please note this issue tracker is not a help forum. We recommend using StackOverflow or our discord channel for questions.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 11, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants