feat(next): Support has match and locale option on middleware config (#39257)
## Feature
As the title, support `has` match, `local` that works the same with the `rewrites` and `redirects` of next.config.js on middleware config. With this PR, you can write the config like the following:
```js
export const config = {
matcher: [
"/foo",
{ source: "/bar" },
{
source: "/baz",
has: [
{
type: 'header',
key: 'x-my-header',
value: 'my-value',
}
]
},
{
source: "/en/asdf",
locale: false,
},
]
}
```
Also, fixes https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/39428
related https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/178, https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/179
- [x] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
2022-08-31 18:23:30 +02:00
|
|
|
import type { MiddlewareMatcher } from '../../analysis/get-page-static-info'
|
2022-04-30 13:19:27 +02:00
|
|
|
import { getModuleBuildInfo } from './get-module-build-info'
|
2021-11-02 16:13:15 +01:00
|
|
|
import { stringifyRequest } from '../stringify-request'
|
2022-06-11 03:22:03 +02:00
|
|
|
import { MIDDLEWARE_LOCATION_REGEXP } from '../../../lib/constants'
|
2021-10-20 19:52:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
export type MiddlewareLoaderOptions = {
|
|
|
|
absolutePagePath: string
|
|
|
|
page: string
|
feat(edge): allows configuring Dynamic code execution guard (#39539)
### 📖 What's in there?
Dynamic code evaluation (`eval()`, `new Function()`, ...) is not
supported on the edge runtime, hence why we fail the build when
detecting such statement in the middleware or `experimental-edge` routes
at build time.
However, there could be false positives, which static analysis and
tree-shaking can not exclude:
- `qs` through these dependencies (get-intrinsic:
[source](https://github.com/ljharb/get-intrinsic/blob/main/index.js#L12))
- `function-bind`
([source](https://github.com/Raynos/function-bind/blob/master/implementation.js#L42))
- `has`
([source](https://github.com/tarruda/has/blob/master/src/index.js#L5))
This PR leverages the existing `config` export to let user allow some of
their files.
it’s meant for allowing users to import 3rd party modules who embed
dynamic code evaluation, but do not use it (because or code paths), and
can't be tree-shaked.
By default, it’s keeping the existing behavior: warn in dev, fails to
build.
If users allow dynamic code, and that code is reached at runtime, their
app stills breaks.
### 🧪 How to test?
- (existing) integration tests for disallowing dynamic code evaluation:
`pnpm testheadless --testPathPattern=runtime-dynamic`
- (new) integration tests for allowing dynamic code evaluation: `pnpm
testheadless --testPathPattern=runtime-configurable`
- (amended) production tests for validating the new configuration keys:
`pnpm testheadless --testPathPattern=config-validations`
To try it live, you could have an application such as:
```js
// lib/index.js
/* eslint-disable no-eval */
export function hasUnusedDynamic() {
if ((() => false)()) {
eval('100')
}
}
export function hasDynamic() {
eval('100')
}
// pages/index.jsx
export default function Page({ edgeRoute }) {
return <p>{edgeRoute}</p>
}
export const getServerSideProps = async (req) => {
const res = await fetch(`http://localhost:3000/api/route`)
const data = await res.json()
return { props: { edgeRoute: data.ok ? `Hi from the edge route` : '' } }
}
// pages/api/route.js
import { hasDynamic } from '../../lib'
export default async function handle() {
hasDynamic()
return Response.json({ ok: true })
}
export const config = {
runtime: 'experimental-edge' ,
allowDynamic: '/lib/**'
}
```
Playing with `config.allowDynamic`, you should be able to:
- build the app even if it uses `eval()` (it will obviously fail at
runtime)
- build the app that _imports but does not use_ `eval()`
- run the app in dev, even if it uses `eval()` with no warning
### 🆙 Notes to reviewers
Before adding documentation and telemetry, I'd like to collect comments
on a couple of points:
- the overall design for this feature: is a list of globs useful and
easy enough?
- should the globs be relative to the application root (current
implementation) to to the edge route/middleware file?
- (especially to @sokra) is the implementation idiomatic enough? I've
leverage loaders to read the _entry point_ configuration once, then the
ModuleGraph to get it back during the parsing phase. I couldn't re-use
the existing `getExtractMetadata()` facility since it's happening late
after the parsing.
- there's a glitch with `import { ServerRuntime } from '../../types'` in
`get-page-static-info.ts`
([here](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/39539/files#diff-cb7ac6392c3dd707c5edab159c3144ec114eafea92dad5d98f4eedfc612174d2L12)).
I had to use `next/types` because it was failing during lint. Any clue
why?
### ☑️ Checklist
- [ ] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the
feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a
PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [x] Documentation added
- [x] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [x] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
2022-09-13 00:01:00 +02:00
|
|
|
rootDir: string
|
feat(next): Support has match and locale option on middleware config (#39257)
## Feature
As the title, support `has` match, `local` that works the same with the `rewrites` and `redirects` of next.config.js on middleware config. With this PR, you can write the config like the following:
```js
export const config = {
matcher: [
"/foo",
{ source: "/bar" },
{
source: "/baz",
has: [
{
type: 'header',
key: 'x-my-header',
value: 'my-value',
}
]
},
{
source: "/en/asdf",
locale: false,
},
]
}
```
Also, fixes https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/39428
related https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/178, https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/179
- [x] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
2022-08-31 18:23:30 +02:00
|
|
|
matchers?: string
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// matchers can have special characters that break the loader params
|
|
|
|
// parsing so we base64 encode/decode the string
|
|
|
|
export function encodeMatchers(matchers: MiddlewareMatcher[]) {
|
|
|
|
return Buffer.from(JSON.stringify(matchers)).toString('base64')
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
export function decodeMatchers(encodedMatchers: string) {
|
|
|
|
return JSON.parse(
|
|
|
|
Buffer.from(encodedMatchers, 'base64').toString()
|
|
|
|
) as MiddlewareMatcher[]
|
2021-10-20 19:52:11 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
export default function middlewareLoader(this: any) {
|
2022-06-23 16:13:40 +02:00
|
|
|
const {
|
|
|
|
absolutePagePath,
|
|
|
|
page,
|
feat(edge): allows configuring Dynamic code execution guard (#39539)
### 📖 What's in there?
Dynamic code evaluation (`eval()`, `new Function()`, ...) is not
supported on the edge runtime, hence why we fail the build when
detecting such statement in the middleware or `experimental-edge` routes
at build time.
However, there could be false positives, which static analysis and
tree-shaking can not exclude:
- `qs` through these dependencies (get-intrinsic:
[source](https://github.com/ljharb/get-intrinsic/blob/main/index.js#L12))
- `function-bind`
([source](https://github.com/Raynos/function-bind/blob/master/implementation.js#L42))
- `has`
([source](https://github.com/tarruda/has/blob/master/src/index.js#L5))
This PR leverages the existing `config` export to let user allow some of
their files.
it’s meant for allowing users to import 3rd party modules who embed
dynamic code evaluation, but do not use it (because or code paths), and
can't be tree-shaked.
By default, it’s keeping the existing behavior: warn in dev, fails to
build.
If users allow dynamic code, and that code is reached at runtime, their
app stills breaks.
### 🧪 How to test?
- (existing) integration tests for disallowing dynamic code evaluation:
`pnpm testheadless --testPathPattern=runtime-dynamic`
- (new) integration tests for allowing dynamic code evaluation: `pnpm
testheadless --testPathPattern=runtime-configurable`
- (amended) production tests for validating the new configuration keys:
`pnpm testheadless --testPathPattern=config-validations`
To try it live, you could have an application such as:
```js
// lib/index.js
/* eslint-disable no-eval */
export function hasUnusedDynamic() {
if ((() => false)()) {
eval('100')
}
}
export function hasDynamic() {
eval('100')
}
// pages/index.jsx
export default function Page({ edgeRoute }) {
return <p>{edgeRoute}</p>
}
export const getServerSideProps = async (req) => {
const res = await fetch(`http://localhost:3000/api/route`)
const data = await res.json()
return { props: { edgeRoute: data.ok ? `Hi from the edge route` : '' } }
}
// pages/api/route.js
import { hasDynamic } from '../../lib'
export default async function handle() {
hasDynamic()
return Response.json({ ok: true })
}
export const config = {
runtime: 'experimental-edge' ,
allowDynamic: '/lib/**'
}
```
Playing with `config.allowDynamic`, you should be able to:
- build the app even if it uses `eval()` (it will obviously fail at
runtime)
- build the app that _imports but does not use_ `eval()`
- run the app in dev, even if it uses `eval()` with no warning
### 🆙 Notes to reviewers
Before adding documentation and telemetry, I'd like to collect comments
on a couple of points:
- the overall design for this feature: is a list of globs useful and
easy enough?
- should the globs be relative to the application root (current
implementation) to to the edge route/middleware file?
- (especially to @sokra) is the implementation idiomatic enough? I've
leverage loaders to read the _entry point_ configuration once, then the
ModuleGraph to get it back during the parsing phase. I couldn't re-use
the existing `getExtractMetadata()` facility since it's happening late
after the parsing.
- there's a glitch with `import { ServerRuntime } from '../../types'` in
`get-page-static-info.ts`
([here](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/39539/files#diff-cb7ac6392c3dd707c5edab159c3144ec114eafea92dad5d98f4eedfc612174d2L12)).
I had to use `next/types` because it was failing during lint. Any clue
why?
### ☑️ Checklist
- [ ] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the
feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a
PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [x] Documentation added
- [x] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [x] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
2022-09-13 00:01:00 +02:00
|
|
|
rootDir,
|
feat(next): Support has match and locale option on middleware config (#39257)
## Feature
As the title, support `has` match, `local` that works the same with the `rewrites` and `redirects` of next.config.js on middleware config. With this PR, you can write the config like the following:
```js
export const config = {
matcher: [
"/foo",
{ source: "/bar" },
{
source: "/baz",
has: [
{
type: 'header',
key: 'x-my-header',
value: 'my-value',
}
]
},
{
source: "/en/asdf",
locale: false,
},
]
}
```
Also, fixes https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/39428
related https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/178, https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/179
- [x] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
2022-08-31 18:23:30 +02:00
|
|
|
matchers: encodedMatchers,
|
2022-06-23 16:13:40 +02:00
|
|
|
}: MiddlewareLoaderOptions = this.getOptions()
|
feat(next): Support has match and locale option on middleware config (#39257)
## Feature
As the title, support `has` match, `local` that works the same with the `rewrites` and `redirects` of next.config.js on middleware config. With this PR, you can write the config like the following:
```js
export const config = {
matcher: [
"/foo",
{ source: "/bar" },
{
source: "/baz",
has: [
{
type: 'header',
key: 'x-my-header',
value: 'my-value',
}
]
},
{
source: "/en/asdf",
locale: false,
},
]
}
```
Also, fixes https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/39428
related https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/178, https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/179
- [x] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
2022-08-31 18:23:30 +02:00
|
|
|
const matchers = encodedMatchers ? decodeMatchers(encodedMatchers) : undefined
|
2021-11-02 16:13:15 +01:00
|
|
|
const stringifiedPagePath = stringifyRequest(this, absolutePagePath)
|
2022-04-30 13:19:27 +02:00
|
|
|
const buildInfo = getModuleBuildInfo(this._module)
|
|
|
|
buildInfo.nextEdgeMiddleware = {
|
feat(next): Support has match and locale option on middleware config (#39257)
## Feature
As the title, support `has` match, `local` that works the same with the `rewrites` and `redirects` of next.config.js on middleware config. With this PR, you can write the config like the following:
```js
export const config = {
matcher: [
"/foo",
{ source: "/bar" },
{
source: "/baz",
has: [
{
type: 'header',
key: 'x-my-header',
value: 'my-value',
}
]
},
{
source: "/en/asdf",
locale: false,
},
]
}
```
Also, fixes https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/39428
related https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/178, https://github.com/vercel/edge-functions/issues/179
- [x] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
2022-08-31 18:23:30 +02:00
|
|
|
matchers,
|
2022-06-08 16:10:05 +02:00
|
|
|
page:
|
2022-06-11 03:22:03 +02:00
|
|
|
page.replace(new RegExp(`/${MIDDLEWARE_LOCATION_REGEXP}$`), '') || '/',
|
2022-04-30 13:19:27 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
feat(edge): allows configuring Dynamic code execution guard (#39539)
### 📖 What's in there?
Dynamic code evaluation (`eval()`, `new Function()`, ...) is not
supported on the edge runtime, hence why we fail the build when
detecting such statement in the middleware or `experimental-edge` routes
at build time.
However, there could be false positives, which static analysis and
tree-shaking can not exclude:
- `qs` through these dependencies (get-intrinsic:
[source](https://github.com/ljharb/get-intrinsic/blob/main/index.js#L12))
- `function-bind`
([source](https://github.com/Raynos/function-bind/blob/master/implementation.js#L42))
- `has`
([source](https://github.com/tarruda/has/blob/master/src/index.js#L5))
This PR leverages the existing `config` export to let user allow some of
their files.
it’s meant for allowing users to import 3rd party modules who embed
dynamic code evaluation, but do not use it (because or code paths), and
can't be tree-shaked.
By default, it’s keeping the existing behavior: warn in dev, fails to
build.
If users allow dynamic code, and that code is reached at runtime, their
app stills breaks.
### 🧪 How to test?
- (existing) integration tests for disallowing dynamic code evaluation:
`pnpm testheadless --testPathPattern=runtime-dynamic`
- (new) integration tests for allowing dynamic code evaluation: `pnpm
testheadless --testPathPattern=runtime-configurable`
- (amended) production tests for validating the new configuration keys:
`pnpm testheadless --testPathPattern=config-validations`
To try it live, you could have an application such as:
```js
// lib/index.js
/* eslint-disable no-eval */
export function hasUnusedDynamic() {
if ((() => false)()) {
eval('100')
}
}
export function hasDynamic() {
eval('100')
}
// pages/index.jsx
export default function Page({ edgeRoute }) {
return <p>{edgeRoute}</p>
}
export const getServerSideProps = async (req) => {
const res = await fetch(`http://localhost:3000/api/route`)
const data = await res.json()
return { props: { edgeRoute: data.ok ? `Hi from the edge route` : '' } }
}
// pages/api/route.js
import { hasDynamic } from '../../lib'
export default async function handle() {
hasDynamic()
return Response.json({ ok: true })
}
export const config = {
runtime: 'experimental-edge' ,
allowDynamic: '/lib/**'
}
```
Playing with `config.allowDynamic`, you should be able to:
- build the app even if it uses `eval()` (it will obviously fail at
runtime)
- build the app that _imports but does not use_ `eval()`
- run the app in dev, even if it uses `eval()` with no warning
### 🆙 Notes to reviewers
Before adding documentation and telemetry, I'd like to collect comments
on a couple of points:
- the overall design for this feature: is a list of globs useful and
easy enough?
- should the globs be relative to the application root (current
implementation) to to the edge route/middleware file?
- (especially to @sokra) is the implementation idiomatic enough? I've
leverage loaders to read the _entry point_ configuration once, then the
ModuleGraph to get it back during the parsing phase. I couldn't re-use
the existing `getExtractMetadata()` facility since it's happening late
after the parsing.
- there's a glitch with `import { ServerRuntime } from '../../types'` in
`get-page-static-info.ts`
([here](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/39539/files#diff-cb7ac6392c3dd707c5edab159c3144ec114eafea92dad5d98f4eedfc612174d2L12)).
I had to use `next/types` because it was failing during lint. Any clue
why?
### ☑️ Checklist
- [ ] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the
feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a
PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [x] Documentation added
- [x] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [x] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
2022-09-13 00:01:00 +02:00
|
|
|
buildInfo.rootDir = rootDir
|
2021-10-20 19:52:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return `
|
2022-07-20 16:53:27 +02:00
|
|
|
import { adapter, blockUnallowedResponse, enhanceGlobals } from 'next/dist/server/web/adapter'
|
2021-10-20 19:52:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2022-07-20 16:53:27 +02:00
|
|
|
enhanceGlobals()
|
2022-02-18 09:39:30 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2021-10-20 19:52:11 +02:00
|
|
|
var mod = require(${stringifiedPagePath})
|
|
|
|
var handler = mod.middleware || mod.default;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (typeof handler !== 'function') {
|
|
|
|
throw new Error('The Middleware "pages${page}" must export a \`middleware\` or a \`default\` function');
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
export default function (opts) {
|
feat(middleware)!: forbids middleware response body (#36835)
_Hello Next.js team! First PR here, I hope I've followed the right practices._
### What's in there?
It has been decided to only support the following uses cases in Next.js' middleware:
- rewrite the URL (`x-middleware-rewrite` response header)
- redirect to another URL (`Location` response header)
- pass on to the next piece in the request pipeline (`x-middleware-next` response header)
1. during development, a warning on console tells developers when they are returning a response (either with `Response` or `NextResponse`).
2. at build time, this warning becomes an error.
3. at run time, returning a response body will trigger a 500 HTTP error with a JSON payload containing the detailed error.
All returned/thrown errors contain a link to the documentation.
This is a breaking feature compared to the _beta_ middleware implementation, and also removes `NextResponse.json()` which makes no sense any more.
### How to try it?
- runtime behavior: `HEADLESS=true yarn jest test/integration/middleware/core`
- build behavior : `yarn jest test/integration/middleware/build-errors`
- development behavior: `HEADLESS=true yarn jest test/development/middleware-warnings`
### Notes to reviewers
The limitation happens in next's web adapter. ~The initial implementation was to check `response.body` existence, but it turns out [`Response.redirect()`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/packages/next/server/web/spec-compliant/response.ts#L42-L53) may set the response body (https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/31886). Hence why the proposed implementation specifically looks at response headers.~
`Response.redirect()` and `NextResponse.redirect()` do not need to include the final location in their body: it is handled by next server https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/packages/next/server/next-server.ts#L1142
Because this is a breaking change, I had to adjust several tests cases, previously returning JSON/stream/text bodies. When relevant, these middlewares are returning data using response headers.
About DevEx: relying on AST analysis to detect forbidden use cases is not as good as running the code.
Such cases are easy to detect:
```js
new Response('a text value')
new Response(JSON.stringify({ /* whatever */ })
```
But these are false-positive cases:
```js
function returnNull() { return null }
new Response(returnNull())
function doesNothing() {}
new Response(doesNothing())
```
However, I see no good reasons to let users ship middleware such as the one above, hence why the build will fail, even if _technically speaking_, they are not setting the response body.
## Feature
- [x] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [x] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [x] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
## Documentation / Examples
- [x] Make sure the linting passes by running `yarn lint`
2022-05-20 00:02:20 +02:00
|
|
|
return blockUnallowedResponse(adapter({
|
2021-10-20 19:52:11 +02:00
|
|
|
...opts,
|
2021-10-26 17:03:39 +02:00
|
|
|
page: ${JSON.stringify(page)},
|
|
|
|
handler,
|
feat(middleware)!: forbids middleware response body (#36835)
_Hello Next.js team! First PR here, I hope I've followed the right practices._
### What's in there?
It has been decided to only support the following uses cases in Next.js' middleware:
- rewrite the URL (`x-middleware-rewrite` response header)
- redirect to another URL (`Location` response header)
- pass on to the next piece in the request pipeline (`x-middleware-next` response header)
1. during development, a warning on console tells developers when they are returning a response (either with `Response` or `NextResponse`).
2. at build time, this warning becomes an error.
3. at run time, returning a response body will trigger a 500 HTTP error with a JSON payload containing the detailed error.
All returned/thrown errors contain a link to the documentation.
This is a breaking feature compared to the _beta_ middleware implementation, and also removes `NextResponse.json()` which makes no sense any more.
### How to try it?
- runtime behavior: `HEADLESS=true yarn jest test/integration/middleware/core`
- build behavior : `yarn jest test/integration/middleware/build-errors`
- development behavior: `HEADLESS=true yarn jest test/development/middleware-warnings`
### Notes to reviewers
The limitation happens in next's web adapter. ~The initial implementation was to check `response.body` existence, but it turns out [`Response.redirect()`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/packages/next/server/web/spec-compliant/response.ts#L42-L53) may set the response body (https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/31886). Hence why the proposed implementation specifically looks at response headers.~
`Response.redirect()` and `NextResponse.redirect()` do not need to include the final location in their body: it is handled by next server https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/packages/next/server/next-server.ts#L1142
Because this is a breaking change, I had to adjust several tests cases, previously returning JSON/stream/text bodies. When relevant, these middlewares are returning data using response headers.
About DevEx: relying on AST analysis to detect forbidden use cases is not as good as running the code.
Such cases are easy to detect:
```js
new Response('a text value')
new Response(JSON.stringify({ /* whatever */ })
```
But these are false-positive cases:
```js
function returnNull() { return null }
new Response(returnNull())
function doesNothing() {}
new Response(doesNothing())
```
However, I see no good reasons to let users ship middleware such as the one above, hence why the build will fail, even if _technically speaking_, they are not setting the response body.
## Feature
- [x] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [x] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [x] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
## Documentation / Examples
- [x] Make sure the linting passes by running `yarn lint`
2022-05-20 00:02:20 +02:00
|
|
|
}))
|
2021-10-20 19:52:11 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
`
|
|
|
|
}
|