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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Better support monorepos by allowing users to opt into automatically resolving 'root' with
rootMode: "upward"
. #8660Better support monorepos by allowing users to opt into automatically resolving 'root' with
rootMode: "upward"
. #8660Changes from all commits
859bde0
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe we could set a max limit, we can be almost sure to not find any config after 30 iterations. That will avoid tranversing the whole system in some special setups.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We do this type of loop in several places during config resolution. I'm not sure it's worth it to over-optimize up front, especially since you have to opt into the
upward-optional
mode for it to have been wasted time.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok that make sense, i'm just worried about some undebuggable issues that it could cause.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We could also link to the website to learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't generally do that with assertions. This is mostly here to satisfy Flow. The user should never see this and if we got here, it means Flow didn't catch a type error somewhere, since it would mean we got a
RootMode
type that didn't match the type definition.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Got you, there's a config validation before that anyway (
assertRootMode
).Just FYI I used to use https://github.com/xtuc/mamacro#examples for only assertion, they are quite close to C ones.