I just installed ESLint and I can successfully run it by doing this at the terminal window:
./node_modules/.bin/eslint app
Note: app is the root folder I want lint to inspect.
I then put that exact command in my package.json:
"scripts": {
"lint": "./node_modules/.bin/eslint app"
}
I expected to be able to run it in the terminal window like this:
npm run lint
Note: I know how to fix the no-undef error. My question is about the many errors lines after that.
It actually works, but it also produces a bunch of errors after showing me the correct output:
Why is that happening?
This is the default way of how the npm script runner handles script errors (i.e. non-zero exit codes). This will always happen, even if you only run a script like exit 1.
I'm not sure why this feature exists, it seems annoying and useless in most cases.
If you don't want to see this, you can add || true at the end of your script.
Example:
lint: "eslint app || true"
As you might've noticed, I've omitted the part to the eslint binary. The npm script runner already includes local binaries as part of the path when trying to run the script so there is no need to use the full path.
document is a global, so eslint thinks you are missing an import somewhere. For those cases, you can adapt your config so that the error is not reported, Something like this:
module.exports = {
"globals": {
"document": true
}
}
this should be saved as .eslintrc.js and be at the same level where your package.json is
Related
Our team has built a small CLI used for maintenance. The package.json specifies a path for with the bin property, and everything works great; "bin": { "eddy": "./dist/src/cli/entry.js"}
Autocompletion is achived by using yargs#17.0.1. However we recently converted the project to use es6 modules, because of a migration to Sveltekit, i.e. the package.json now contains type: module. Because of this, the CLI now only works if we run with:
what works
node --experimental-specifier-resolution=node ./dist/src/cli/entry.js help
However, if we run this without the flag, we get an error "module not found":
Error [ERR_MODULE_NOT_FOUND]: Cannot find module...
So the question is
Can we somehow "always" add the experimental-specifier-resolution=node to the CLI - so we can continue to use the shorthand eddy, and utilize auto completion?
There are two probable solutions here.
Solution 1
Your entry.js file should start with a shebang like #!/usr/bin/env node. You cannot specify the flag directly here, however, if you could provide the absolute path to node directly in the shebang, you can specify the flag.
Assuming you have node installed in /usr/bin/node, you can write the shebang in entry.js like:
#!/usr/bin/node --experimental-specifier-resolution=node
(Use which node to find the absolute path)
However, this is not a very portable solution. You cannot always assume everyone has node installed in the same path. Also some may use nvm to manage versions and can have multiple version in different path. This is the reason why we use /usr/bin/env to find the required node installation in the first place. This leads to the second solution.
Solution 2
You can create a shell script that would intern call the cli entry point with the required flags. This shell script can be specified in the package.json bin section.
The shell script (entry.sh) should look like:
#!/usr/bin/env bash
/usr/bin/env node --experimental-specifier-resolution=node ./entry.js "$#"
Then, in your package.json, replace bin with:
"bin": { "eddy": "./dist/src/cli/entry.sh"}
So when you run eddy, it will run the entry.js using node with the required flag. The "$#" in the command will be replaced by any arguments that you pass to eddy.
So eddy help will translate to /usr/bin/env node --experimental-specifier-resolution=node ./entry.js help
Just add a script to your package.json:Assuming index.js is your entry point and package.json is in the same directory
{
"scripts": {
"start": "node --experimental-specifier-resolution=node index.js"
}
}
Then you can just run on your console:
npm start
I'm using Stencil.js to create a web component library and I'm heavily relying on E2E tests. As they're rather slow it becomes more and more cumbersome to run the entire test suite (using the Stencil.js CLI) while developing new components.
However, I'm not able to run single tests in my IDE (IntelliJ IDEA) or via command line. It works perfectly fine for unit tests though.
My Jest config looks like this:
module.exports = {
"roots": [
"<rootDir>/src"
],
"preset": "#stencil/core/testing"
}
When I try to run tests in a single file (jest --config jest.config.js --testPathPattern src/components/button/button.e2e.ts$)
it fails, because
newE2EPage() is only available from E2E tests, and ran with the --e2e cmd line flag.
newE2EPage() comes with Stencil.js and I don't know what Stencil.js's CLI does in the background. Furthermore, I cloned the Stencil.js repository, just to see if it is working with their E2E tests (https://github.com/ionic-team/stencil/tree/master/test/end-to-end) but it doesn't work either.
Any idea how I can configure Jest so that it's able to run Stencil.js-E2E tests from the command line?
The --e2e flag is used for the npm script in the package.json. To start e2e tests, you can add this in your package.json:
"scripts": {
"test:e2e": "stencil test --e2e"
}
And run npm run test:e2e. For a specific file, you add it at the end like this:
npm run test:e2e src/components/button/button.e2e.ts
For more info, see the StencilJS doc: https://stenciljs.com/docs/end-to-end-testing
i have the same problem. IntelliJ and 'Run' single 'it' didnt work.
newE2EPage() is only available from E2E tests, and ran with the --e2e cmd line flag.
when i run 'npm run test' everything will work fine. the difference is that npm run stencil before and only jest dont work.
here is the stencil jest dir https://github.com/ionic-team/stencil/tree/master/src/testing/jest aswell a config.
i found in here https://stenciljs.com/docs/testing-overview a VS-CODE run jest code but no Intellij setup.
im on the run to get the path of the current file to run stencil via npm and the path the e2e file. but i cant find the correct variable for the run config.
i hope we got this solved soon.
cheers
I am not a VS Code user, but in contrast to IntelliJ there is a launch.json for VSC to run single tests: https://github.com/ionic-team/stencil-site/pull/480
Currently, I have two folders: __tests__ for unit (fast) tests and __integration__ for slow tests.
Then, in package.json:
{
"scripts": {
"test": "jest",
"test:integration": "jest -c '{}'",
...
},
"jest": {
"testPathIgnorePatterns": ["/node_modules/", "__integration__"]
}
}
So, when I want to do TDD, I'm running just npm test and when I want to test the entire project, npm run test:integration.
As Jest is offered as a "no configuration" test framework, I was thinking if there's a better (or proper) way to configure this.
Thank you.
Quoting from this post.
You can try name files like:
index.unit.test.js and api.int.test.js
And with Jest’s pattern matching feature, it makes it simple to run
them separately as well. For unit testing run jest unit and for
integration testing run jest int.
File structure/location you can define based on your preferences as the pattern matching based on the file name is how jest knows what to run.
Also see jest cli documentation about npm scripts:
If you run Jest via npm test, you can still use the command line
arguments by inserting a -- between npm test and the Jest arguments
Have you tried jest --watch for TDD? It runs only files related to your git changes, runs errors first and heavily utilise cache for speed.
Other than that, jest -c accepts a path, not a string. You should be good with jest -c jest-integration-config.json, provided that jest-integration-config.json sits in your project's root.
I have a package of custom rules which I want to pull in (eslint-config-common), then use an .eslintrc file to override some of them.
extends: common
rules:
no-invalid-this: 0 # override a rule in common
If I run it directly, it all works as expected:
./node_modules/.bin/eslint src/**/*.js
Though if I run it as an .sh file or through an NPM script like lint: eslint src/**/*.js, it doesn't pull in the extends rules. It only runs using the rules found directly in .eslintrc. In my case, that's really bad since my .eslintrc is generally just turning off or down rules I don't want to use.
I've run it with DEBUG:eslint:* and it finds and loads the proper extends file, it just doesn't seem to apply the rules.
I found a bug similar to this, which they seem to say is fixed: https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/2754
This bug seems similar, so I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong, or if there is still a bug.
I'm using the latest version of eslint 3.17.1
It turned out I was using a glob without wrapping it in quotation marks. It seems like NPM chewed on it a bit and it seems like it only went down as deep as one directory.
Instead of this:
"script": {
"lint": "eslint path/to/code/**/*.js"
}
Use this:
"script": {
"lint": "eslint 'path/to/code/**/*.js'"
}
Inside my composer.json, there's a postinstall hook setup like the following:
"scripts" : {
"dist" : "node dist; node_modules/.bin/doccoh src/package.js",
"postinstall" : "node_modules/.bin/grunt setup || true; node_modules/.bin/bower install",
"start" : "node server.js"
}
Whenever I run it (on Win from Git/Gnu Bash CLI), I end with
command not found. either the command was written wrong or couldn't be found
Rough translation from German CLI error.
I tried splitting it into multiple ;/semicolon separated parts and first cd into that directory, but it simply ends up with the same error message. Replacing the whole postinstall command set with a simple ls does work. So I guess the problem might be the semicolon separation or a wrong usage of commands. But overall I got no idea what's wrong.
Note: I got grunt-cli version 0.1.9 and grunt version 0.4.1 installed globally.
I'm a bit late to answer, but if you're on Windows, multiple commands on a single line are executed with the use of &&
postinstall: "some command && some other -c"
I ran into this looking for something and thought this may help other people. I have found it easier to move to postinstall.js files as things get a little complicated. This makes it easier to deal with moving forward.