[lexical-markdown] Refactor: Update regExpEnd optional type in MultilineElementTransformer

[untilhamza]

[lexical-markdown] Refactor: Broaden regExpEnd optional type to boolean

Description

Current Behavior:
In the MultilineElementTransformer interface, the regExpEnd property's optional field was unnecessarily restricted to only accept true as a value. This strict typing didn't provide any practical benefit and limited potential use cases where false might be a valid state.

Changes:

• Modified the type definition of optional in regExpEnd from true to boolean
• This change allows for more flexible usage of the optional flag
• Makes the type definition more intuitive and consistent with typical boolean flag patterns

Closes #[issue number]

Test plan

Before

The regExpEnd type was overly restrictive:

regExpEnd?: RegExp | {
  optional?: true;  // Could only be true
  regExp: RegExp;
};

After

The regExpEnd type now allows both true and false values:

CopyInsert
regExpEnd?: RegExp | {
  optional?: boolean;  // Can be either true or false
  regExp: RegExp;
};

This change maintains backward compatibility while providing more flexibility in how the optional flag can be used.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
lexical	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Dec 8, 2024 3:14am
lexical-playground	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Dec 8, 2024 3:14am

[facebook-github-bot]

Hi @untilhamza!

Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community.

Action Required

In order to merge any pull request (code, docs, etc.), we require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement, and we don't seem to have one on file for you.

Process

In order for us to review and merge your suggested changes, please sign at https://code.facebook.com/cla. If you are contributing on behalf of someone else (eg your employer), the individual CLA may not be sufficient and your employer may need to sign the corporate CLA.

Once the CLA is signed, our tooling will perform checks and validations. Afterwards, the pull request will be tagged with CLA signed. The tagging process may take up to 1 hour after signing. Please give it that time before contacting us about it.

If you have received this in error or have any questions, please contact us at cla@meta.com. Thanks!

[github-actions]

size-limit report 📦

Path	Size
lexical - cjs	31.11 KB (0%)
lexical - esm	30.98 KB (0%)
@lexical/rich-text - cjs	40.11 KB (0%)
@lexical/rich-text - esm	32.8 KB (0%)
@lexical/plain-text - cjs	38.68 KB (0%)
@lexical/plain-text - esm	30.11 KB (0%)
@lexical/react - cjs	42 KB (0%)
@lexical/react - esm	34.15 KB (0%)

[facebook-github-bot]

Thank you for signing our Contributor License Agreement. We can now accept your code for this (and any) Meta Open Source project. Thanks!

[etrepum]

The reason why you would use optional?: true is to make it clear that the default is false, and that there's no reason to specify it otherwise. I'm not sure this really has any benefit, there are other places in the code where an optional true is used as the type (such as discrete?: true and skipTransforms?: true), so if this change was desired I would expect that it would be done to the whole project. Does anyone else have opinions on this? @zurfyx @ivailop7

Generally speaking it's best to use types to limit the number of possible runtime states that should to be considered. {x?: boolean} has 4 states and {x?: true} has 3 (one less each when exactOptionalPropertyTypes is used)

[untilhamza]

The reason why you would use optional?: true is to make it clear that the default is false, and that there's no reason to specify it otherwise. I'm not sure this really has any benefit, there are other places in the code where an optional true is used as the type (such as discrete?: true and skipTransforms?: true), so if this change was desired I would expect that it would be done to the whole project. Does anyone else have opinions on this? @zurfyx @ivailop7

Generally speaking it's best to use types to limit the number of possible runtime states that should to be considered. {x?: boolean} has 4 states and {x?: true} has 3 (one less each when exactOptionalPropertyTypes is used)

@etrepum , this is actually very insightful - thank you. However I did not know the default was false as I could not tell from just looking at the types. Is there a way to explicitly tell the user of the function that the default is false while keeping the type as true?

[etrepum]

The type itself already says that either the setting doesn't mean anything at all, or the default is not true. What you could do to make it more explicit for people who don't understand that implication is to add more documentation to the type.

[untilhamza]

I see what you mean. I will close this PR for now. Thanks for sharing the thinking behind it.