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

fix: merge objects with Module type #121

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jan 5, 2024
Merged

fix: merge objects with Module type #121

merged 7 commits into from
Jan 5, 2024

Conversation

manniL
Copy link
Member

@manniL manniL commented Jan 5, 2024

πŸ”— Linked issue

Resolves #119

❓ Type of change

  • πŸ“– Documentation (updates to the documentation, readme, or JSdoc annotations)
  • 🐞 Bug fix (a non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
  • πŸ‘Œ Enhancement (improving an existing functionality like performance)
  • ✨ New feature (a non-breaking change that adds functionality)
  • 🧹 Chore (updates to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries)
  • ⚠️ Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

πŸ“š Description

πŸ“ Checklist

  • I have linked an issue or discussion.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 5, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests βœ…

Comparison is base (7c7a9a4) 44.74% compared to head (3174b1b) 45.73%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #121      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   44.74%   45.73%   +0.99%     
==========================================
  Files           4        4              
  Lines         219      223       +4     
  Branches       33       35       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits           98      102       +4     
  Misses        119      119              
  Partials        2        2              

β˜” View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
πŸ“’ Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

src/defu.ts Outdated
@@ -57,8 +56,7 @@ function _isPlainObject(value: unknown): boolean {
(prototype === null ||
prototype === Object.prototype ||
Object.getPrototypeOf(prototype) === null) &&
!(Symbol.toStringTag in value) &&
!(Symbol.iterator in value)
(!(Symbol.toStringTag in value) || !(Symbol.iterator in value))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm wondering if it is purely for Date merging fix, using instance of Date would be faster

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it isn't. See the linked issue. It also applies to Module (import via *)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, I see! With this PR want to merge Module instances!

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Checking, this logic currently basically bypasses entire L59 as iterator symbol does not exist in any of tested values (removing the line also all the tests pass). Wondering how we can cover it

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, I see! With this PR want to merge Module instances!

yes indeed πŸ‘πŸ»

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Checking, this logic currently basically bypasses entire L59 as iterator symbol does not exist in any of tested values (removing the line also all the tests pass). Wondering how we can cover it

Oh, I see πŸ€” That's a bit tricky. I also wonder how to cover it then...

But - do we need to? Dates are correctly replaced (not merged) like that too

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have ported test suite of is-plain-object (see commits to main) and also merged in with this PR. Intrestingly we will be breaking two more tests at least (Math and native arguments will be wrongly detected as pure object)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated with a logic that precisely works for Module to reduce (more!) regression chances

@pi0 pi0 changed the title fix: merge some non-plain objects properly fix: merge Module objects Jan 5, 2024
@pi0 pi0 changed the title fix: merge Module objects fix: merge objects with Module type Jan 5, 2024
@pi0 pi0 merged commit 1b9fcab into main Jan 5, 2024
3 checks passed
@pi0 pi0 deleted the fix/merge-non-plain-obj branch January 5, 2024 18:42
@ferferga ferferga mentioned this pull request Jan 10, 2024
8 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug] Objects exported with '* as' export aren't merged recursively
2 participants