fix: include test files in language server #4696
Open
+1
−53
Conversation
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
so that `languageService.getProgram().getTypeChecker().getTypeAtLocation(node)`
for a node in `.test.ts` file would return correct type node
instead of `error` TypeObject
```
TypeObject {
flags: 1,
id: 5,
intrinsicName: 'error',
debugIntrinsicName: undefined,
objectFlags: 52953088
}
```
And remove `isTestFile` function from `ConfigSet` which is no longer used
Owner
|
@boblat can you update this to get tests passing? |
Collaborator
|
This is actually a breaking change so we need to hold it for a while until Jest 30 is out |
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Summary
languageService.getProgram().getTypeChecker().getTypeAtLocation(node)for a node in.test.tsfile would return correct type object instead oferrorTypeObjectisTestFilefunction fromConfigSetwhich is no longer usedTest plan
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Other information