New: add getPhysicalFilename() method to rule context (fixes #11989)

[snitin315]

Prerequisites checklist

• I have read the contributing guidelines.

What is the purpose of this pull request? (put an "X" next to an item)

[ ] Documentation update
[ ] Bug fix (template)
[ ] New rule (template)
[ ] Changes an existing rule (template)
[ ] Add autofixing to a rule
[ ] Add a CLI option
[ ] Add something to the core
[X] Other, please explain:

What changes did you make? (Give an overview)

Fix #11989

add a new getPhysicalFilename() method to the rule context object. This method will return the full path of the file on disk without any code block information.

Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?

No

[nzakas]

Overall looks good. Just one question.

[mdjermanovic]

LGTM, thanks!

[nzakas]

LGTM. Thanks.

[mdjermanovic]

Thanks for contributing!

[JounQin]

@snitin315 @nzakas @mdjermanovic

I find physicalFilename is not available in ValidTestCase, so it makes testing cases for virtual filename unavailable, should that be supported?

Before context.getPhysicalFilename, I have a custom util getPhysicalFilename and a test case like:

ruleTester.run('remark', remark, {
  valid: [
    {
      code: '<header>Header2</header>',
      parser,
      parserOptions,
      filename: path.resolve(__filename, '0-fake.mdx'), // virtual filename
    },
  ],
})

But when I migrate to context.getPhysicalFilename, it results context.getPhysicalFilename() === filename, it is not correct, so maybe a new physicalFilename option is required for this case:

ruleTester.run('remark', remark, {
  valid: [
    {
      code: '<header>Header2</header>',
      parser,
      parserOptions,
      physicalFilename: __filename,
      filename: path.resolve(__filename, '0-fake.mdx'), // virtual filename
    },
  ],
})

[btmills]

@JounQin I'd guess we'll want to do that. Can you open an issue? People aren't as likely to see things that are part of finished discussions.

[JounQin]

@JounQin I'd guess we'll want to do that. Can you open an issue? People aren't as likely to see things that are part of finished discussions.

See #14800