Skip to content

Conversation

@Austaras
Copy link
Member

@Austaras Austaras commented Oct 28, 2025

Description:

图片

BREAKING CHANGE:

Related issue (if exists):
Closes #11167

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings October 28, 2025 11:11
@Austaras Austaras requested a review from a team as a code owner October 28, 2025 11:11
@changeset-bot
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Oct 28, 2025

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 7e93796

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

This PR addresses an issue where the parser incorrectly positioned the program start, causing leading comments and JSDoc annotations to be misplaced after import statements in the generated output. The fix ensures that programs start at the actual beginning of the input, preserving the correct order of comments and code.

Key changes:

  • Modified parser to correctly track program start position at input beginning
  • Fixed comment positioning for files with leading comments before imports/code
  • Updated test fixtures to reflect correct comment placement

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 293 out of 644 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File Description
Multiple test reference files (.1.normal.js) Updated test outputs showing comments now correctly appear before imports instead of after
Test fixture output files Fixed comment positioning in various scenarios including JSDoc, copyright notices, and inline comments
New test case files (crates/swc/tests/fixture/issues-110xx/11167/) Added new test case demonstrating the fix for issue #11167

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

@Austaras
Copy link
Member Author

Some investigation

For code

// 123
class A extends B {

}

Current swc would output

// 123
import { _ as _call_super } from "@swc/helpers/_/_call_super";
import { _ as _class_call_check } from "@swc/helpers/_/_class_call_check";
import { _ as _inherits } from "@swc/helpers/_/_inherits";
var A = /*#__PURE__*/ function(B1) {
    "use strict";
    _inherits(A, B1);
    function A() {
        _class_call_check(this, A);
        return _call_super(this, A, arguments);
    }
    return A;
}(B);

tsc would output

"use strict";
var __extends = (this && this.__extends) || (function () {
    var extendStatics = function (d, b) {
        extendStatics = Object.setPrototypeOf ||
            ({ __proto__: [] } instanceof Array && function (d, b) { d.__proto__ = b; }) ||
            function (d, b) { for (var p in b) if (Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(b, p)) d[p] = b[p]; };
        return extendStatics(d, b);
    };
    return function (d, b) {
        if (typeof b !== "function" && b !== null)
            throw new TypeError("Class extends value " + String(b) + " is not a constructor or null");
        extendStatics(d, b);
        function __() { this.constructor = d; }
        d.prototype = b === null ? Object.create(b) : (__.prototype = b.prototype, new __());
    };
})();
// 123
var A = /** @class */ (function (_super) {
    __extends(A, _super);
    function A() {
        return _super !== null && _super.apply(this, arguments) || this;
    }
    return A;
}(B));

babel would output

function _callSuper(t, o, e) { return o = babelHelpers.getPrototypeOf(o), babelHelpers.possibleConstructorReturn(t, _isNativeReflectConstruct() ? Reflect.construct(o, e || [], babelHelpers.getPrototypeOf(t).constructor) : o.apply(t, e)); }
function _isNativeReflectConstruct() { try { var t = !Boolean.prototype.valueOf.call(Reflect.construct(Boolean, [], function () {})); } catch (t) {} return (_isNativeReflectConstruct = function _isNativeReflectConstruct() { return !!t; })(); }
// 123
var A = /*#__PURE__*/function (_B) {
  function A() {
    babelHelpers.classCallCheck(this, A);
    return _callSuper(this, A, arguments);
  }
  babelHelpers.inherits(A, _B);
  return babelHelpers.createClass(A);
}(B);

This PR would change to babel output.

@Austaras
Copy link
Member Author

Some comments would be lost because they're now attached to typescript syntax node which would be eliminated later.

@codspeed-hq
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Oct 28, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #11199 will not alter performance

Comparing Austaras:main (7e93796) with main (6a9fa49)1

Summary

✅ 138 untouched

Footnotes

  1. No successful run was found on main (d14de24) during the generation of this report, so 6a9fa49 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings October 28, 2025 11:43
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 293 out of 4003 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.


💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings October 29, 2025 12:23
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 293 out of 4007 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.


💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

@kdy1 kdy1 added this to the Planned milestone Oct 29, 2025
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings October 30, 2025 04:17
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 30, 2025

Binary Sizes

File Size
swc.linux-x64-gnu.node 31M (31917576 bytes)

Commit: aedecfe

@kdy1
Copy link
Member

kdy1 commented Oct 31, 2025

CI failures look like a real failure, but I think it may be better to wait until I finish #11205

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings November 1, 2025 09:06
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 293 out of 4021 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.


💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings November 2, 2025 17:17
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 293 out of 4022 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.


💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

/*
@internal
*/ declare class StripInternalClassFields {
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This comment should be removed.

@kdy1
Copy link
Member

kdy1 commented Nov 5, 2025

I started reviewing this. Sorry for the late review.

@@ -1,11 +1,4 @@
/**
* @license
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure if this is expected. I think we need to preserve some kinds of comments, and @license is one of them

Copy link
Member Author

@Austaras Austaras Nov 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This happens because in original code

/**
 * @license
 * Lodash <https://lodash.com/>
 * Copyright OpenJS Foundation and other contributors <https://openjsf.org/>
 * Released under MIT license <https://lodash.com/license>
 * Based on Underscore.js 1.8.3 <http://underscorejs.org/LICENSE>
 * Copyright Jeremy Ashkenas, DocumentCloud and Investigative Reporters & Editors
 */
;(function() {

It's considered as an leading comment for EmptyStatement, but that EmptyStatement is removed during minify. It's expected in the sense that this is how this PR should work, but we still need to get the comment back somehow.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Top-level comments should be placed after @swc/helpers imports

2 participants