Navigation Menu

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

add __webpack_module__ and __webpack_module_id__ to the api #15282

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 31, 2022

Conversation

sokra
Copy link
Member

@sokra sokra commented Jan 31, 2022

What kind of change does this PR introduce?
feature

Did you add tests for your changes?
yes

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
no

What needs to be documented once your changes are merged?

  • __webpack_module__ equals to module but is always available (module is not available in strict ESM)
  • __webpack_module_id__ equals to module.id but is always available (module is not available in strict ESM)

@webpack-bot
Copy link
Contributor

webpack-bot commented Jan 31, 2022

For maintainers only:

  • This needs to be documented (issue in webpack/webpack.js.org will be filed when merged)
  • This needs to be backported to webpack 4 (issue will be created when merged)

@webpack-bot
Copy link
Contributor

I've created an issue to document this in webpack/webpack.js.org.

@@ -201,6 +201,39 @@ class APIPlugin {
)
.setRange(expr.range)
);

parser.hooks.expression
.for("__webpack_module_id__")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

maybe __webpack_module__.id this looks more natural + we could want add another property like __webpack_module__[property]

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yep

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants