rsnext/test/integration/dist-dir
Sukka d21025cc3a
refactor: rewrite config schema in zod (#56383)
The PR supersedes the https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/53150, which is way too outdated, has way too many conflicts, and also heavily relies on GitHub Copilot (which makes the progress slow and tedious).

The PR uses [`json-schema-to-zod`](https://github.com/StefanTerdell/json-schema-to-zod) (instead of the GitHub Copilot) to generate the zod schema, and manually replaces all generated `z.customRefine` with my hand-written zod schema.

TODO:

- [x] Convert schema
- [x] Reduce `z.any()` usage
- [x] Create human-readable errors from the `ZodError`
- [x] Update test cases to reflect the latest error message

-----

The benefit of using zod over ajv:

- Easier maintenance: zod schema is straightforward to compose.
- Better typescript support: config schema now strictly reflects the `NextConfig` type.
- Smaller installation size: by replacing `ajv` and `@segment/ajv-human-errors` w/ `zod`, I am able to reduce installation size by 114 KiB.
- Better Extension: the zod error message is easy to customize.

-----

In the previous PR https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/56083, @feedthejim replaces `zod` w/ `superstruct`. `superstruct` is lightweight and fast, which makes it perfect for creating simple schemas for RSC payload. But, this also means `superstruct` has its limitations compared to `zod`:

- `superstruct`'s syntax is different, and some utilities's usage is counter-intuitive:
  - `z.array(z.string()).gt(1)` vs `s.size(s.array(s.string()), 1)`
  - `z.numer().gt(1)` vs `s.size(s.number(), 1)`, `s.min(s.number(), 1)`
  - `z.boolean().optional().nullable()` vs `s.nullable(s.optional(z.boolean()))`
- `superstruct` has weaker TypeScript support and worse DX compared to `zod` when composing huge schema:
  - `zod.ZodType + z.object()` can provide a more detailed type mismatch message on which specific property is the culprit, while `Describe + s.object()` provides almost no information at all.
- `zod`'s schema is more powerful
  - `z.function()` supports `z.args()` and `z.returns()`, while `superstruct` only has `s.func()`
  - zod also has Promise type `z.promise()` and intersection type `z.and()`
- `superstruct`'s error is harder to parse compared to `zod`'s `ZodError` 

So in the PR, I re-introduced `zod` for `next.config.js` validation.
2023-10-05 15:46:53 +00:00
..
pages Format missed files (#7464) 2019-05-29 18:19:32 -07:00
test refactor: rewrite config schema in zod (#56383) 2023-10-05 15:46:53 +00:00
next.config.js Improve linting rules to catch more errors (#9374) 2019-11-10 19:24:53 -08:00