Skip to content

chore: remove some todos #16515

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

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jul 28, 2025
Merged

chore: remove some todos #16515

merged 6 commits into from
Jul 28, 2025

Conversation

Ocean-OS
Copy link
Member

@Ocean-OS Ocean-OS commented Jul 27, 2025

This removes some // TODO comments. It shouldn't change much behavior-wise, as it's mostly tweaks to types.
Since this does change an AST node's type, I will update #16188 once this is merged.

Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following

  • It's really useful if your PR references an issue where it is discussed ahead of time. In many cases, features are absent for a reason. For large changes, please create an RFC: https://github.com/sveltejs/rfcs
  • Prefix your PR title with feat:, fix:, chore:, or docs:.
  • This message body should clearly illustrate what problems it solves.
  • Ideally, include a test that fails without this PR but passes with it.
  • If this PR changes code within packages/svelte/src, add a changeset (npx changeset).

Tests and linting

  • Run the tests with pnpm test and lint the project with pnpm lint

Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Jul 27, 2025

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 59ac067

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Name Type
svelte Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

@svelte-docs-bot
Copy link

Copy link
Contributor

Playground

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/svelte@16515

@@ -82,7 +82,9 @@ export function CallExpression(node, context) {
['debug', 'dir', 'error', 'group', 'groupCollapsed', 'info', 'log', 'trace', 'warn'].includes(
node.callee.property.name
) &&
node.arguments.some((arg) => arg.type !== 'Literal') // TODO more cases?
node.arguments.some(
(arg) => arg.type === 'SpreadElement' || context.state.scope.evaluate(arg).values.has(UNKNOWN)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Evaluation of SpreadElement will result in UNKNOWN anyway, so the first check can be removed, right?
And maybe it's cleaner to add has/is_unknown prop-flag to Evaluation and use it here.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Scope.evaluate's parameters only accept an Expression node, which does not include SpreadElements.
I'll add the has unknown check in a bit.

@Rich-Harris
Copy link
Member

I actually don't think we can rename Comment without it being a breaking change (for e.g. svelte-ast-print or anything else that operates on the AST). Even though we've stated that it's subject to change, I don't think we should change things like this unless we really need to. It's already disambiguated enough in my view — AST.Comment vs e.g. ESTree.Comment

@Ocean-OS
Copy link
Member Author

If you were to walk a Svelte AST, you wouldn't easily know the difference between an ESTree comment and a Svelte comment. Stuff like printing would get a bit ugly as you'd have to check the type of the parent node against a large group of possible types.
I do agree that there is the concern of this being a breaking change, but to be honest are there really that many things dependent on the Svelte AST types? Not to mention that svelte-ast-print will likely be sunsetted when the print function is merged.

@7nik 7nik merged commit 03f2e44 into main Jul 28, 2025
15 checks passed
@7nik 7nik deleted the remove-some-todos branch July 28, 2025 18:56
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jul 28, 2025
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.

3 participants