Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 31, 2023. It is now read-only.

Revert "feat(rome_js_parser, rome_js_formatter): import attribute (#4359)" #4496

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 30, 2023

Conversation

ematipico
Copy link
Contributor

@ematipico ematipico commented May 17, 2023

This reverts commit 0f04d8c.

Summary

Test Plan

Changelog

  • The PR requires a changelog line

Documentation

  • The PR requires documentation
  • I will create a new PR to update the documentation

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented May 17, 2023

Deploy Preview for docs-rometools canceled.

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 4eaea6d
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/docs-rometools/deploys/6475bca15f65b10008aa7f6b

@github-actions github-actions bot added A-Formatter Area: formatter A-Parser Area: parser A-Tooling Area: our own build, development, and release tooling labels May 17, 2023
@ematipico ematipico changed the title Revert "feat(rome_js_parser, rome_js_formatter): import attribute (#4… Revert "feat(rome_js_parser, rome_js_formatter): import attribute (#4359)" May 17, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 17, 2023

Parser conformance results on ubuntu-latest

js/262

Test result main count This PR count Difference
Total 48863 48863 0
Passed 47810 47810 0
Failed 1053 1053 0
Panics 0 0 0
Coverage 97.84% 97.84% 0.00%

jsx/babel

Test result main count This PR count Difference
Total 40 40 0
Passed 37 37 0
Failed 3 3 0
Panics 0 0 0
Coverage 92.50% 92.50% 0.00%

symbols/microsoft

Test result main count This PR count Difference
Total 6212 6212 0
Passed 1763 1763 0
Failed 4449 4449 0
Panics 0 0 0
Coverage 28.38% 28.38% 0.00%

ts/babel

Test result main count This PR count Difference
Total 639 639 0
Passed 573 573 0
Failed 66 66 0
Panics 0 0 0
Coverage 89.67% 89.67% 0.00%

ts/microsoft

Test result main count This PR count Difference
Total 17224 17224 0
Passed 13121 13121 0
Failed 4103 4103 0
Panics 0 0 0
Coverage 76.18% 76.18% 0.00%

@ematipico
Copy link
Contributor Author

@denbezrukov @Conaclos should we revert the change in the grammar and wait for the major tools first?

@ematipico ematipico marked this pull request as ready for review May 23, 2023 13:44
@Conaclos
Copy link
Contributor

I have no strong opinions about this. I am wondering: could we support both for transitional purpose?

@ematipico
Copy link
Contributor Author

I will update the PR with both grammars

@ematipico
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rome/core-contributors

Please check my latest commit. I decided to keep the change to a minimum, without adding new nodes and changes to the semantics.

I think as a temporary solution it could work until we will change to the new grammar for good. What do you think?

@denbezrukov
Copy link
Contributor

denbezrukov commented May 30, 2023

Look good to me👍🏽👍🏽
I was wondering that the previous name "ImportAttribute" was better than "Assertion".
But I'm ok with both names:)

@ematipico ematipico merged commit 039b6ab into main May 30, 2023
@ematipico ematipico deleted the revert/import-attribute branch May 30, 2023 12:46
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
A-Formatter Area: formatter A-Parser Area: parser A-Tooling Area: our own build, development, and release tooling
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants