fix(js_formatter): fix function parameter grouping heuristic checking type parameters#1153
Merged
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for biomejs ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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
Playground Link.
This was a minor bug that only shows up two times in our entire monorepo: when a function declaration has a single generic type parameter, the parameters for that function sometimes end up getting grouped so that they prefer to break before the return type for the function does. If the parameter has a constraint (
extends ...) or a default value (= DefaultType), then the parameters don't group, but if neither are present, then the parameters might group based on further heuristics.However, the logic here had the constraint checked flipped from
is_some()tois_none(), meaning the inverse was happening, as seen in the playground.Test Plan
There was a prettier diff snapshot that I didn't even notice covering this case, but that's deleted now since the output matches.