Skip to content

Comment in and fix reportNonDefaultExport #676

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 3 commits into from
Mar 19, 2025

Conversation

frodi-karlsson
Copy link
Contributor

Unlocked by implied node format

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I might be wrong but I think this regression is due to getEmitSyntaxForModuleSpecifierExpression not being implemented, but they're just getting surfaced by these changes. Should I aim to implement that as well to confirm that theory in this PR? I'm torn between scope of changes and want for confidence

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If it's straightforward, what you have I think is already an improvement.

@jakebailey
Copy link
Member

What is here seems correct, save for a couple of go-specific nits which I don't think really matter.

@jakebailey
Copy link
Member

Yeah, to go further we need getEmitSyntaxForUsageLocation. #267 contained the port of that but needs to be rebased.

@jakebailey jakebailey added this pull request to the merge queue Mar 19, 2025
Merged via the queue into microsoft:main with commit c7ed601 Mar 19, 2025
22 checks passed
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.

2 participants