This updates our `moduleResolution` to `bundler` as this matches our heuristics much more closely so is more accurate. This shouldn't be a breaking change is it should be compatible with our previous default.
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <22380829+ijjk@users.noreply.github.com>
### Fixing a bug
- [x] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Tests added. See:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### What?
Currently, when the check on validating the type of `revalidate` is run,
we use the `Number` function to parse the value of `revalidate`, however
the `Number` function takes a
[`StringNumericLiteral`](https://tc39.es/ecma262/2023/#prod-StringNumericLiteral)
which doesn't allow the usage of the `_` separator to format your
numbers. This PR allows you to add numeric separators in the
`revalidate` export.
### Why?
When configuring the actual code, we should be allowed to use numeric
separators as it is a syntax that is supported by most runtimes.
### How?
A simple `replaceAll` call that removes all `_`s between digits.
Closes NEXT-1122
Fixes#49485
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
## What?
Removes `experimental.appDir` this was leftover from when I flipped the
switch.
Kept the config file as in the future we might add future flags and
such. It also helps that it has the types comment included so you always
get types.
<!-- Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that
you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
## For Contributors
### Improving Documentation or adding/fixing Examples
- The "examples guidelines" are followed from our contributing doc
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md
- Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`. See
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/repository/linting.md
### Fixing a bug
- Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- Tests added. See:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### Adding a feature
- Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature
request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR. (A
discussion must be opened, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/new?category=ideas)
- Related issues/discussions are linked using `fixes #number`
- e2e tests added
(https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Documentation added
- Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
## For Maintainers
- Minimal description (aim for explaining to someone not on the team to
understand the PR)
- When linking to a Slack thread, you might want to share details of the
conclusion
- Link both the Linear (Fixes NEXT-xxx) and the GitHub issues
- Add review comments if necessary to explain to the reviewer the logic
behind a change
### What?
### Why?
### How?
Closes NEXT-
Fixes #
-->
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
This pull request extends the type checking functionality of the
`typedRoutes` feature, which is currently available in the `<Link
href={Route}>` component, to the following `router` APIs:
`router.push()`, `router.prefetch()`, and `router.replace()`. The
implementation leverages the existing work done for the `<Link>`
component, allowing for a straightforward integration of type checking
into the aforementioned `router` APIs.
fix NEXT-501
Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
## For Contributors
### Improving Documentation or adding/fixing Examples
- The "examples guidelines" are followed from our contributing doc https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md
- Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`. See https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/repository/linting.md
### Fixing a bug
- Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- Tests added. See: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### Adding a feature
- Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR. (A discussion must be opened, see https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/new?category=ideas)
- Related issues/discussions are linked using `fixes #number`
- e2e tests added (https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Documentation added
- Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
## For Maintainers
- Minimal description (aim for explaining to someone not on the team to understand the PR)
- When linking to a Slack thread, you might want to share details of the conclusion
- Link both the Linear (Fixes NEXT-xxx) and the GitHub issues
- Add review comments if necessary to explain to the reviewer the logic behind a change
### What?
This PR adds next-types-plugin's support for Route Handlers.
### Why?
Since `route.js` is somewhat like `page.js` and `layout.js`, I find it to be necessary that we also enable TS checks for these files as well.
### How?
Just changing the `createTypeGuardFile` function a bit and adding a few new tests, yeah.
This PR refactors the types plugin a bit and adds support for optional match groups in rewrites and redirects:
```js
source: '/redirect(/v1)?/guides/:param/page'
```
Which will be created as two rules:
```ts
| `/redirect/guides/${SafeSlug<T>}/page`
| `/redirect/v1/guides/${SafeSlug<T>}/page`
```
fix NEXT-875 ([link](https://linear.app/vercel/issue/NEXT-875))
This PR makes `typedRoutes` stricter by constraining generics in `Route` to type string. I've also made generating types for routes a bit more efficient by moving `redirects` and `rewrites`'s processing to the plugin's constructor since `rewrites` and `redirects` don't change in both dev and prod.
I've also been trying to fix a bug where route types doesn't generate all the routes (some appear, some don't), but I've got no clues since that doesn't seem easy to reproduce (perhaps it only happens in my case?)
## Bug
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [ ] Integration tests added
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see [`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Feature
- [ ] 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`
- [ ] [e2e](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs) tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see [`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Documentation / Examples
- [ ] Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`
- [ ] The "examples guidelines" are followed from [our contributing doc](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md)
<!--
Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that
you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
-->
This PR fixes some issue caused by PR 46327, which asserted that
`NextBuildContext.original(Rewrites|Redirects)` are defined although
`config._original(Redirects|Rewrites)` (which these two copied from) are
not actually defined when `config.redirects`/`config.rewrites` are not
as well (see `loadRedirects`/`loadRewrites`). So this PR fixes that by
removing those assertions and checking whether those are defined in
`createRouteDefinitions` before iterating them.
## Bug
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [ ] Integration tests added
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see
[`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Feature
- [ ] 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`
- [ ]
[e2e](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs)
tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see
[`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Documentation / Examples
- [ ] Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`
- [ ] The "examples guidelines" are followed from [our contributing
doc](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md)
---------
This PR refactors the implementation of `Route<T>` to be more compact
(2/3 fewer union types), and adds support for static rewrites and
redirects. Check the updated test for more details.
In the future I plan to continue to refactor this by extract static
routes out as unions (instead of always relying on type inference) for
better autocompletion. Maybe a dev-only feature?
## Bug
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see
[`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Feature
- [ ] 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`
- [ ]
[e2e](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs)
tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see
[`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Documentation / Examples
- [ ] Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`
- [ ] The "examples guidelines" are followed from [our contributing
doc](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md)
Fixes#46401
This PR fixes route groups not working with Windows by handling slashes properly by replacing RegEx expressions with `ensureLeadingSlash`, `getPageFromPath` (which uses `normalizePathSep`),... It also adds a test that ensures `typedRoutes` works with route groups to `app-types.test.js`.
It also replaces `fs.readFile` and String's `replaceAll` that were used to augment `next` in PR 46332 (which were rather overkill and inefficient in my opinion) with a `export * from "next/types/index.d.ts"`.
I've also converted `edgeRouteTypes` and `nodeRouteTypes` to 2 Sets so as to avoid duplications. When we write type `Route`, we also check if a route in `nodeRouteTypes` is already defined in `edgeRouteTypes`.
Types like `SearchOrHash`, `Suffix`, `SafeSlug`,... have also been made private to module "next" (before this PR users could access to these types anywhere in their workspace, which doesn't seem like an expected behaviour in my opinion).
## Bug
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [ ] Integration tests added
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see [`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Feature
- [ ] 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`
- [ ] [e2e](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs) tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see [`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Documentation / Examples
- [ ] Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`
- [ ] The "examples guidelines" are followed from [our contributing doc](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md)
Closes#45088.
Rewrite the type guard implementation, it now works via 2 parts:
- `Diff<A, B>` this makes sure that `B` is either `any` or extends `A`, and then excludes all fields in `A` from `B`, only keeps the extra fields
- `checkFields<X>()` ensures that `X` doesn't have any fields
So with `checkFields<Diff<ExpectedInterface, Interface>>()` we can ensure that it is a valid interface and it does not have extra fields. For functions, we use the same utility to check parameter types and return types.
## Bug
- [x] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [x] Integration tests added
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see [`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Feature
- [ ] 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`
- [ ] [e2e](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs) tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see [`contributing.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md)
## Documentation / Examples
- [ ] Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`
- [ ] The "examples guidelines" are followed from [our contributing doc](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md)
