fix(jest-transform): ensure correct config is passed to preprocessors specified multiple times in transform
#13770
Conversation
… specified multiple times in `transform`
|
Hi @coffeebeats! Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community. Action RequiredIn 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. ProcessIn 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 If you have received this in error or have any questions, please contact us at [email protected]. Thanks! |
|
Thank you for signing our Contributor License Agreement. We can now accept your code for this (and any) Meta Open Source project. Thanks! |
|
Thank you for signing our Contributor License Agreement. We can now accept your code for this (and any) Meta Open Source project. Thanks! |
|
ESLint caught something - you can run |
|
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
Fixes #13769.
Summary
Regarding the
transformoption of Jest configuration, it's not currently possible to use the same preprocessor with different configuration objects for different match patterns. This is because the latest entry intransformfor a given preprocessor will always overwrite the configuration of earlier entries. See #13769 for more context.Implementation
Instead of caching preprocessors and the corresponding configuration based solely on the preprocessor path, we can cache based on the match pattern + preprocessor path pair. While there are different ways of going about this, here I've updated
transformCacheto use a simple string concatenation of the file match pattern + preprocessor path for its keys. This ensures that the correct configuration can be identified.Please let me know if you'd prefer an alternative means of solving this problem - I'm happy to adjust.
Test plan
I included a new unit test which validates this case. In addition to ensuring all current tests pass, please let me know if there's any other tests that would be useful to write.