I am currently migrating my Angular-webpack 3 application into webpack 4. Everything works fine except two warnings. I searched for the same and the blog below says the you have to use Rule.parser.system: true.
https://github.com/webpack/webpack/issues/6357
But not able to judge the syntax. Please help.
warnings
To remove the System.import warning message, add the 'Rule.parser.system: true` like this:
module: {
rules: {
parser: {
system: true,
},
},
},
Reference: https://webpack.js.org/configuration/module/#rule-parser
Related
[docusaurus] Newbie question: I am attempting to get mermaid up and running on my website, but am struggling to implement https://docusaurus.io/docs/markdown-features/diagrams. My docusaurus.config.js file is structured as follows:
const config = {
...
presets: [
...
],
themeConfig:
({
...
}),
}
module.exports = config;
Where should the block
markdown: {
mermaid: true,
},
themes: ['#docusaurus/theme-mermaid'].
be included in this structure?
I have attempted to include the stated block at all different points in the config.js file, but I either get a compile fail, or compile succeed, but no mermaid behaviour.
Thanks!
It is now working - I think the issue here was that the project I was attempting to use mermaid on was a 2.1.0 project. Once I updated it to 2.2.0 then things work as the documentation suggests.
i have been trying to find documentation on this but i havent been able to. I use stylint in a project and we have the css order option activated. I haven't been able to set up VS code to show the errors and i haven't found a page with the information to actually know the order,so i always need to check on compile time if i have any mistakes in the CSS order properties, and it shows a huge error on screen.
this are the stylelint rules we have
module.exports = {
extends: ['stylelint-config-standard', 'stylelint-config-concentric-order'],
rules: {
'at-rule-no-unknown': [
true,
{
ignoreAtRules: ['mixin', 'if', 'else', 'include', 'extend']
}
],
'max-nesting-depth': 4,
indentation: 4,
// add your custom config here
// https://stylelint.io/user-guide/configuration
'selector-pseudo-element-no-unknown': [
true,
{
ignorePseudoElements: ['v-deep']
}
]
}
}
I dont see anything weird about it. It there a page where i can find the correct order? it is so annoying because when i get a stylelint order error, i usually have to find it in a few tries.
You are extending the stylelint-config-concentric-order community config. This config includes and configures the stylelint-order community plugin. You can find the order of the properties in the repo on GitHub.
You can see Stylelint errors in VS Code using the official Stylelint extension.
And you can have the extension automatically fix problems on save, which will include the order of your properties, using the editor.codeActionsOnSave configuration property:
{
"editor.formatOnSave": true,
"editor.codeActionsOnSave": {
"source.fixAll.stylelint": true
},
"stylelint.validate": ["css", "postcss","scss"],
"css.validate": false,
"scss.validate": false
}
Alternatively, you can run npx stylelint "**/*.scss" --fix" on the command line to automatically fix problems.
I am trying the Quasar Framework (for those not familiar, it's based on Vue) and it's going well. However I've tried running a build (npm run build) and get repeated:
error Unexpected console statement no-console
... so the build fails because it sees console.log(...) and is not happy. My options:
don't use console.log in development. But it's handy.
comment out the eslint rule that presumably enforces that, so letting console.log into production. But that's not ideal for performance/security.
have the build automatically remove any console.log. That's what I'm after.
But how?
I took a look at the build https://quasar.dev/quasar-cli/cli-documentation/build-commands and it mentions using webpack internally and UglifyJS too. Given that, I found this answer for removing console.log in a general Vue/webpack project: https://github.com/vuejs-templates/webpack-simple/issues/21
... but if that's how, where does that go within Quasar since there is no webpack config file? I imagine in the quasar.conf.js file (since I see an 'extendWebpack' line in there - sounds promising). Or is there a better way to do it? How do other people remove console.log in production when using Quasar? Or handle logging without it?
Thanks!
https://quasar.dev/quasar-cli/quasar-conf-js#Property%3A-build
quasar.conf.js:
module.exports = function (ctx) {
return {
...
build: {
...
uglifyOptions: {
compress: { drop_console: true }
}
},
}
}
The above will result in configuring terser plugin with the following:
terserOptions: {
compress: {
...
drop_console: true
},
(https://github.com/terser/terser#compress-options)
(you can see the generated config with quasar inspect -c build -p optimization.minimizer)
You still also need to remove the eslint rule to avoid build errors, see https://github.com/quasarframework/quasar/issues/5529
Note:
If you want instead to configure webpack directly use:
quasar.conf.js:
module.exports = function (ctx) {
return {
...
build: {
...
chainWebpack (chain) {
chain.optimization.minimizer('js').tap(args => {
args[0].terserOptions.compress.drop_console = true
return args
})
}
},
}
}
It will do the same as above.
See https://quasar.dev/quasar-cli/cli-documentation/handling-webpack
and https://github.com/neutrinojs/webpack-chain#config-optimization-minimizers-modify-arguments
https://github.com/quasarframework/quasar/blob/dev/app/lib/webpack/create-chain.js#L315
1 Edit package.json in Vue's project what had created it before.
2 Then find "rules": {}.
3 Change to this "rules":{"no-console":0}.
4 if you Vue server in on, off it and run it again. Then the issue will be done.
As an alternative I can suggest using something like loglevel instead of console.log. It's quite handy and allows you to control the output.
I have the following configuration, but it still does not remove console.log statements:
new webpack.optimize.UglifyJsPlugin({
compress: {
warnings: false,
pure_funcs: ['console.log'],
drop_console: true,
comments: false
},
pure_funcs: ['console.log'],
drop_console: true,
comments: false
})
What am I doing wrong?
It's possible that the messages you are getting are debugging messages in the console, rather than console.log. I had a similar issue where I thought using drop_console would suffice. I had to add drop_debugger as well, so given your example, this should remove all console output.
new webpack.optimize.UglifyJsPlugin({
compress: {
warnings: false,
drop_console: true,
drop_debugger: true
},
comments: false
})
It is not the reason of uglifyjs in my case. It is caused by babel-loader which will transform console.log to (e = console).log.
I do not know how to fix it now. Finally, I have to use a babel plugin named babel-plugin-transform-remove-console to remove console.
However I do want to use UglifyJsPlugin.
This is a hint for those who can find out a resolution.
I had the same problem with drop_console not working in my react script setup (on Windows 10, React-script version 0.8.5).
Trying to reproduce this problem I created a brand new app, added console.log somewhere in App.js and drop_console: true in webpack.config.prod.js. However in this simple setup drop_console works and console.log is removed.
As it still didn't work in my real app I installed strip-loader:
npm install --save-dev strip-loader
then edited webpack.config.prod.js in node_modules\react-scripts\config (without ejecting from react):
var WebpackStrip = require('strip-loader'); // around line 20
...
// inserted in module/loaders between babel and style loaders, around line 168
{
test: /\.js$/,
loader: WebpackStrip.loader('debug', 'console.log')
},
Sure enough, all console.log statements were removed (npm run build). I then removed all my changes from the config and console.log were still being removed. I uninstalled strip-loader and the build still successfully removes console.log statements.
I cannot explain this behaviour, but at least it works (although somewhat magically).
I´m trying to setup a build workflow using the aforementioned technologies, but I´m getting the following error, which seems very generic upon running tests on karma:
TypeError: 'undefined' is not an object (evaluating 'a.Sifter=b()')
This happens even without adding any ECMSA6 specific feature. The same workflow works fine without the transpiling phase in the workflow.
What I tried was to set the babeljs after a concatenation phase and before executing a uglifying on it, like the following snippet:
var defaultTasks = [
"sass:prod", // compile scss sources
"cleanAll", // clean folders: preparing for copy
"copyAll", // copying bower files
"cssmin:customVendor", // minify and concat 'customized from vendor' css
"concat:vendorStyles", // concat vendors's css + minified 'customized from vendor' and distribute as 'css/vendor.css'
"uglify:rawVendors", // minifies unminified vendors
"concat:vendorScripts", // concat vendors's scripts and distribute as 'scripts/vendor.js'
"ngAnnotate:app", // ng-annotates app's scripts
"concat:appScripts", // concat app's (customized from vendor's + ng-annotated + customer's)
"babel",// uses babeljs to convert brandnew ES6 javascript into ES5 allowing for old browsers
"uglify:app" // minify app script and distribute as 'scripts/app.js'
];
if (!skipTest) {
defaultTasks.push("karma:target"); // run tests on minified scripts
}
The imporant definitions are shown:
babel: {
options: {
"presets": ['es2015']
},
dist: {
files: {
"<%= concat.appScripts.dest %>": "<%= concat.appScripts.dest %>"
}
}
},
uglify: {
options: {
mangle: {
except: [
"jQuery", "angular", "tableau", "LZString", "moment", "Moment", "Modernizr",
"app", "modules"
]
}
},
app: {
files: [{
src: ["<%= concat.appScripts.dest %>"],
dest: "<%= app.dist %>/scripts/app.js"
}]
}
},
I´ve tested the transpile a bit, running the default logic from babel url, and it works well, converting basic stuff.
Is there any better workflow that I could use to still run the tests against the same code that would be executed for real?
Thanks
In the end, the workflow was correct.
I just need to modify the filesets a bit in order to avoid transpiling the selectize.js file (which wasn´t really needed).
However, not sure why it was breaking
That solved to me, so I´m closing the question, but perhaps might be useful for someone else.