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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Support custom names for "browser" field resolution #1918

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Aug 9, 2019
Merged

Support custom names for "browser" field resolution #1918

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
11 changes: 9 additions & 2 deletions index.js
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -83,12 +83,19 @@ function Browserify (files, opts) {
self._transforms = [];
self._entryOrder = 0;
self._ticked = false;
self._bresolve = opts.browserField === false

var browserField = opts.browserField
self._bresolve = browserField === false
? function (id, opts, cb) {
if (!opts.basedir) opts.basedir = path.dirname(opts.filename)
resolve(id, opts, cb)
}
: bresolve
: typeof browserField === 'string'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

are we sure nobody is putting a string value now, and relying on it being a noop?

What if it's an empty string?

Copy link
Member Author

@feross feross Aug 8, 2019 •
edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Right now any value other than false (including an empty string) just does normal "browser" field resolution.

We've never supported any value other than false for this argument and since this is an additive change, I'd argue it could be released in a minor version. But I'm also fine with releasing it in a major version to be extra safe, though I think it's a bit overkill.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sorry, that was two questions :-) you answered the first, but not the second - after this PR, should an empty string be allowed?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The simplest rule would be: if the type is string, then we look for that key in package.json and apply the "browser" field spec.

So, then an empty string would look for an empty string key in package.json.

But it's also likely to be a bug, so also I'm okay with throwing an exception in this case.

? function (id, opts, cb) {
opts.browser = browserField
bresolve(id, opts, cb)
}
: bresolve
;
self._syntaxCache = {};

Expand Down
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion readme.markdown
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -447,7 +447,9 @@ useful for preserving the original paths that a bundle was generated with.
`opts.bundleExternal` boolean option to set if external modules should be
bundled. Defaults to true.

When `opts.browserField` is false, the package.json browser field will be ignored.
When `opts.browserField` is false, the package.json browser field will be
ignored. When `opts.browserField` is set to a `string`, then a custom field name
can be used instead of the default `"browser"` field.

When `opts.insertGlobals` is true, always insert `process`, `global`,
`__filename`, and `__dirname` without analyzing the AST for faster builds but
Expand Down