Skip to content
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

Fixes update-readme script #15679

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
May 16, 2019
Merged

Fixes update-readme script #15679

merged 6 commits into from
May 16, 2019

Conversation

oandregal
Copy link
Member

@oandregal oandregal commented May 16, 2019

This PR does two things:

Test

@oandregal oandregal self-assigned this May 16, 2019
@oandregal oandregal added [Type] Bug An existing feature does not function as intended [Type] Developer Documentation Documentation for developers [Status] In Progress Tracking issues with work in progress labels May 16, 2019
@oandregal
Copy link
Member Author

Note that this is failing due to some syntax the parser doesn't understand. It looks like this broke with the introduction of short Fragment syntax #15120

@oandregal
Copy link
Member Author

The reason it got in was that errors weren't reported by the update-readme script #15680

v5 has removed the attachComment option that we rely on
for JSDoc parsing. v4.1 is the latest version we can use.
acorn-jsx 5 provokes the parser to fail.
@oandregal oandregal changed the title Update core data readme for changes in actions and selectors Fixes update-readme script May 16, 2019
@oandregal oandregal removed the [Status] In Progress Tracking issues with work in progress label May 16, 2019
Copy link
Member

@mkaz mkaz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good.

I tested it out running the update-readmes script and did not see any local changes around the core-data whitespace or other issues.

@aduth
Copy link
Member

aduth commented May 16, 2019

It doesn't seem we should need to make everything synchronous, vs. just those occurring in the same file. That being said, some recent similar explorations in build parallelization have not proved much value in naive implementations like Promise.all for dozens of tasks, so it may be okay to avoid the overhead in managing synchronous and asynchronous tasks.

The other option to explore if performance becomes a bottleneck is something more like what I'm considering in #15230.

@gziolo gziolo added this to the 5.8 (Gutenberg) milestone May 17, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[Type] Bug An existing feature does not function as intended [Type] Developer Documentation Documentation for developers
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Documentation: core/data README is only updated for changes in selectors
4 participants