-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.6k
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
Modify debug assertion to avoid crashing on SyntaxList #47500
Conversation
src/services/utilities.ts
Outdated
*/ | ||
function findRightmostChildNodeWithTokens(children: Node[], exclusiveStartPosition: number, sourceFile: SourceFile): Node | undefined { | ||
function findRightmostChildNodeWithTokens(n: Node, exclusiveStartPosition: number, sourceFile: SourceFile): Node | undefined { | ||
const children = n.getChildren(sourceFile); |
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.
Not sure if I should bother leaving children
as a parameter to save a little bit of processing; seemed more clear to me to just pass down the parent node and get the children, rather than passing the parent with its children (all call sites technically have the list).
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.
It looks like n
is only needed for its kind and that kind is only needed for an assert so, personally, I'd add a new parameter for the kind to make it clear that it's "extra".
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.
Switched it to that.
src/services/utilities.ts
Outdated
for (let i = exclusiveStartPosition - 1; i >= 0; i--) { | ||
const child = children[i]; | ||
|
||
if (isWhiteSpaceOnlyJsxText(child)) { | ||
Debug.assert(i > 0, "`JsxText` tokens should not be the first child of `JsxElement | JsxSelfClosingElement`"); | ||
if (i === 0 && isWhiteSpaceOnlyJsxText(child)) { |
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.
Can you explain why the index check moved into the if
? That seems like a potentially big behavior change and I'm having trouble reasoning about its effect.
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.
Shoot, you're right! I was trying to be too clever and optimize the assert, but I completely tunnel visioned away the code below. Will revert.
if (isWhiteSpaceOnlyJsxText(child)) { | ||
Debug.assert(i > 0, "`JsxText` tokens should not be the first child of `JsxElement | JsxSelfClosingElement`"); | ||
if (i === 0 && isWhiteSpaceOnlyJsxText(child)) { | ||
Debug.assert(!(isJsxElement(n) || isJsxSelfClosingElement(n)), "`JsxText` tokens should not be the first child of `JsxElement | JsxSelfClosingElement`"); | ||
} | ||
else if (nodeHasTokens(children[i], sourceFile)) { |
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.
Out of scope, but should children[i]
be child
here and below?
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.
Yeah, this seems like an oops. I can fix this, if desired. Shouldn't change anything.
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 as a follow-up.
src/services/utilities.ts
Outdated
if (parentKind === SyntaxKind.JsxText || parentKind === SyntaxKind.JsxSelfClosingElement) { | ||
Debug.assert(i > 0, "`JsxText` tokens should not be the first child of `JsxElement | JsxSelfClosingElement`"); |
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 might just fold the i > 0
into the above condition and turn this into a Debug.fail
, but this is fine.
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.
Yeah, that's a reasonable change.
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.
Thanks!
@typescript-bot cherry-pick this to release-4.5 |
Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to run the task to cherry-pick this into |
Hey @DanielRosenwasser, I've opened #47514 for you. |
Fixes #47446
Fixes #21815
Fixes #46946