feat: support constructor node types #1512
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
domoritz
changed the title
|
Fixed the conflicts here |
Merged
|
🚀 PR was released in |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Hi again! Sorry for "spamming" with PRs - hope you find them useful.
This time I would like to propose a new parser for constructor types, kind of like what the package currently has for function nodes. And similarly to functions, there's no built-in formatter for constructors, so that's kind of up to the user. But it's still nice if the parsing doesn't fail when referencing a type which uses a constructor (even though we're actually not interested in the type at all and have excluded it using
Pick). One example of such a type is React'sReactElementwhich has aJSXElementConstructor, quite similar to the test case I added.I used the same
assertMissingFormatterForutility function as used in the previous PR (#1511)