Release v1.7.13
#467
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ | ||
| #!/usr/bin/env node | ||
| /** | ||
| * Applies the bundled Lexical patches via patch-package. | ||
| * | ||
| * Runs in two contexts: | ||
| * 1. Local development checkout — patches apply to this package's own | ||
| * node_modules. | ||
| * 2. Installed as a dependency of a host project — npm hoists lexical to the | ||
| * host's node_modules, so patch-package must run from the host project | ||
| * root with --patch-dir pointing back at this package's patches directory. | ||
| * Running it from this package's own directory would look for | ||
| * node_modules/@bsf/force-ui/node_modules/lexical, which doesn't exist. | ||
| */ | ||
| const fs = require( 'fs' ); | ||
| const path = require( 'path' ); | ||
| const { spawnSync } = require( 'child_process' ); | ||
|
|
||
| const pkgDir = __dirname; | ||
| const patchDir = path.join( pkgDir, 'patches' ); | ||
|
|
||
| if ( ! fs.existsSync( patchDir ) ) { | ||
| process.exit( 0 ); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const segments = pkgDir.split( path.sep ); | ||
| const nmIndex = segments.lastIndexOf( 'node_modules' ); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. What: Validate the existence of the patch binary before attempting to execute it. Why: Directly constructing the path to the 'patch-package' binary without validating its existence increases the chance of runtime errors. This would enhance the robustness of the script. How: Add a check after defining |
||
| const appRoot = | ||
| nmIndex === -1 | ||
| ? pkgDir | ||
| : segments.slice( 0, nmIndex ).join( path.sep ) || path.sep; | ||
|
|
||
| let patchPackageBin; | ||
| try { | ||
| const manifestPath = require.resolve( 'patch-package/package.json', { | ||
| paths: [ appRoot, pkgDir ], | ||
| } ); | ||
| const manifest = JSON.parse( fs.readFileSync( manifestPath, 'utf8' ) ); | ||
| const binEntry = | ||
| typeof manifest.bin === 'string' | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. What: Consider using Why: Using synchronous calls might block the event loop, especially if this script is executed in a larger context, which could lead to performance bottlenecks. How: Switch to using |
||
| ? manifest.bin | ||
| : manifest.bin[ 'patch-package' ]; | ||
| patchPackageBin = path.join( path.dirname( manifestPath ), binEntry ); | ||
| } catch ( error ) { | ||
| // patch-package is unavailable; skip rather than break the host install. | ||
| process.exit( 0 ); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const result = spawnSync( | ||
| process.execPath, | ||
| [ patchPackageBin, '--patch-dir', path.relative( appRoot, patchDir ) ], | ||
| { cwd: appRoot, stdio: 'inherit' } | ||
| ); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. What: Ensure the exit status checks are handled properly after executing the patch command. Why: While the current implementation checks the result of the command execution, it is beneficial to provide specific behavior based on different exit statuses (e.g., 0 for success, others for failure) to offer better context. How: Instead of exiting with a direct mapping to |
||
|
|
||
| process.exit( result.status === null ? 1 : result.status ); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What: Consider adding error handling for filesystem operations.
Why: While the current implementation will exit gracefully if the patch directory does not exist or if 'patch-package' is unavailable, it lacks detailed feedback. Proper error handling can help in understanding the failure points during execution.
How: Use
console.error()to log specific error messages beforeprocess.exit. This can provide context on issues for future debugging.