Repository navigation
test: [M3-7820] - Suppress Cypress "MODULE_LEVEL_DIRECTIVE" and "SOURCEMAP_ERROR" warnings #10239
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| "@linode/manager": Tests | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| Suppress Rollup warnings during Cypress tests ([#10239](https://github.com/linode/manager/pull/10239)) |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -1,10 +1,36 @@ | ||
| import react from '@vitejs/plugin-react-swc'; | ||
| import svgr from 'vite-plugin-svgr'; | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Is this package related?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Yeah, I imported both of these plugins to mirror what we're doing in Cloud's Vite config.
|
||
| import { defineConfig } from 'vite'; | ||
| import { URL } from 'url'; | ||
|
|
||
| // ESM-friendly alternative to `__dirname`. | ||
| const DIRNAME = new URL('.', import.meta.url).pathname; | ||
|
|
||
| export default defineConfig({ | ||
| plugins: [react(), svgr({ exportAsDefault: true })], | ||
| build: { | ||
| rollupOptions: { | ||
| // Suppress "SOURCEMAP_ERROR" warnings. | ||
| // This is necessary because MUI contains React SSR "use client" module-level | ||
| // directive, and Rollup does not support module-level directives. | ||
| // `vite-plugin-react` and `vite-plugin-react-swc` both silence this warning, | ||
| // but the inability to handle module-level directives also causes Sourcemap | ||
| // output errors. The warnings for this are not suppressed by Vite plugins, | ||
| // so we need to suppress them ourselves. | ||
| // | ||
| // See also: | ||
| // - https://github.com/vitejs/vite-plugin-react/blob/7f53c63/packages/plugin-react/src/index.ts#L303 | ||
| // - https://github.com/vitejs/vite-plugin-react-swc/blob/53ecc44/src/index.ts#L262 | ||
| // - https://github.com/rollup/rollup/issues/4699#issuecomment-1299770973 | ||
| // - https://github.com/vitejs/vite/issues/15012#issuecomment-1815854072 | ||
| onwarn(warning, defaultHandler) { | ||
| if (warning.code === 'SOURCEMAP_ERROR') { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
Comment on lines
+27
to
+29
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Is there any reason not to suppress
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Yeah, the I appreciate these good questions, @hkhalil-akamai! |
||
| defaultHandler(warning); | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| resolve: { | ||
| alias: { | ||
| '@src': `${DIRNAME}/../src`, | ||
|
|
||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
Are there any tradeoffs to using
swc-- i.e., build differences between e2e and prod?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.
No, but only because Cloud also uses
@vitejs/plugin-react-swc!I think we opted to use that for performance reasons (swc is fast), and so I used it here too, but both
@vitejs/plugin-reactand@vitejs/plugin-react-swccontain the exact same log suppression logic (so either would really work here for the purpose of this ticket).One thing to note is that this Vite config is only used when building the Cypress *.spec.ts files -- Cloud itself is always built using the Vite config in
packages/manager, so while consistency between the configs is good, we're not at risk of ending up in a situation where e.g. Cloud is built differently when running our Cypress tests, resulting in bugs being present (or absent) in our tests but not in Production or vice-versa.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.
Ahh didn't know that. Thanks for the explanation.