ES5 distribution on npm #281

holgerd77 · 2018-03-01T14:16:49Z

Addresses #271, (as discussed and agreed upon in the PR discussion) also alternative solution to PR #274 .

This PR uses Babel to build an ES5 compatible distribution build in the dist folder. The dist/index.js file is then referenced as the main entry point in package.js. The dist folder itself is excluded from the repo (through .gitignore) and just created before publish or testing.

The normal test runs are still done against the lib folder. There is a new test option --dist introduced, which is used for the package.json test scripts and allow for testing against the dist folder files.

Since only the dist folder is included in the npm build, coverage is now also run against the dist folder and coveralls test report will show the dist folder files. This shouldn't be that much of a problem though, since the structure of the files didn't change a lot (except some replacements of const with var e.g.), so it should still be easily possible to identify the code parts missing code coverage.

Update: After some experimentation it turned out that Coveralls showing the files covered couldn't be combined with the desired property of not having the dist folder in Git by excluding the folder in .gitignore. So coverage is now run against the lib folder. Which also makes sense.

One note for review: I also switched the order of some config elements in package.json to be more conform with other libraries. This was a bit unlucky since it hides a bit the relevant changes when just looking at the complete code base changes. Review can therefor better be done by looking through the single commit changes.

…ith other ethereumjs libraries

…g 3rd-party build problems)

…point in package.json

… package.json script cmds to use --dist option

coveralls · 2018-03-01T16:15:53Z

Coverage decreased (-0.009%) to 85.453% when pulling 416e559 on es5-dist into e863b93 on master.

holgerd77 · 2018-03-01T16:32:50Z

~~I've also integrated here state tests and coverage run on travis, so that we don't have to run the state tests twice.~~

Update: have reverted this, makes more sense to run the state tests once on dist folder and for coverage on lib, otherwise coveralls cannot map coverage to the source files.

…8 and 9

holgerd77 · 2018-03-06T09:41:59Z

@Firescar96 reviewed this and gave his ok here, will take this as informal review and merge.

axic · 2018-03-07T11:40:16Z

.travis.yml

@@ -4,7 +4,8 @@ os:

 language: node_js
 node_js:
-  - "6"


Why did we drop 6?

Node 6 is not dropped, it's still below in the test matrix settings. Only the testBuildIntegrity test is run with Node 8 and 9, all the other tests are run against Node 6. So all the test from before are still running with the same environment, with testBuildIntegrity (just running a single state test) we are able to do additional checks without using too much of the limited run time for tests in travis.

Cool, travis config can be misleading in cases, especially when the section shown by github is small :)

So the goal of testBuildIntegrity is to have a quick check with a single test?

Yes, to catch stuff like "is Node 10" generally working, "is the dist folder existing", stuff like that.

axic · 2018-03-07T11:41:22Z

tests/tester.js

@@ -55,7 +55,8 @@ const skipSlow = [
  'static_Call1MB1024Calldepth', // slow
  'static_Callcode50000', // slow
  'static_Return50000', // slow
-  'static_Return50000_2' // slow
+  'static_Return50000_2', // slow
+  'QuadraticComplexitySolidity_CallDataCopy'


Why was this removed?

This test is extremely slow, travis is getting on its limits (sometimes).

axic · 2018-03-07T11:42:01Z

package.json

+    "testBlockchainBlockGasLimit": "npm run build:dist && node --stack-size=1500 ./tests/tester -b --dist --dir='bcBlockGasLimitTest'",
+    "testBlockchainValid": "npm run build:dist && node --stack-size=1500 ./tests/tester -b --dist --dir='bcValidBlockTest'",
+    "testBlockchainTotalDifficulty": "npm run build:dist && node --stack-size=1500 ./tests/tester -b --dist --dir='bcTotalDifficultyTest'",
+    "test": "node ./tests/tester -a",


This is lacking build:dist.

Tests don't necessarily have to be run against the dist folder, this can now be switched providing the dist option. The test command (which I think isn't used anyhow), is remaining on lib (was undecided on this). We could generally make this more explicit by renaming test commands to e.g. testBlockchain:dist, not sure if this is necessary though.

axic · 2018-03-07T11:42:15Z

package.json

+    "dist"
+  ],
+  "scripts": {
+    "coverage": "istanbul cover ./tests/tester.js -- -s",


This is lacking build:dist.

No, it's not, this is explained above. I'll cite here:

"Update: After some experimentation it turned out that Coveralls showing the files covered couldn't be combined with the desired property of not having the dist folder in Git by excluding the folder in .gitignore. So coverage is now run against the lib folder. Which also makes sense."

Ah I see, if --dist is specified it runs on the dist directory, otherwise on lib.

axic · 2018-03-07T11:42:25Z

package.json

+  "scripts": {
+    "coverage": "istanbul cover ./tests/tester.js -- -s",
+    "coveralls": "npm run coverage && coveralls <coverage/lcov.info",
+    "testVM": "node ./tests/tester -v",


This is lacking build:dist.

VM tests are not active atm, this would only be pseudo-consistency.

axic · 2018-03-07T11:43:06Z

package.json

+    "testBlockchainValid": "npm run build:dist && node --stack-size=1500 ./tests/tester -b --dist --dir='bcValidBlockTest'",
+    "testBlockchainTotalDifficulty": "npm run build:dist && node --stack-size=1500 ./tests/tester -b --dist --dir='bcTotalDifficultyTest'",
+    "test": "node ./tests/tester -a",
+    "lint": "standard",


Will lint ignore the dist directory?

Yeah I see the dist/** line in apackage.json, just the change view on github didn't made it apparent.

axic · 2018-03-07T11:43:13Z

package.json

+    "testBlockchainTotalDifficulty": "npm run build:dist && node --stack-size=1500 ./tests/tester -b --dist --dir='bcTotalDifficultyTest'",
+    "test": "node ./tests/tester -a",
+    "lint": "standard",
+    "prepublishOnly": "npm run lint && npm run build:dist && npm run testBuildIntegrity",


Not sure if this will run build:dist twice?

Yes, it does, could probably be removed. The dist build is not taking that much time though, just a couple of seconds.

holgerd77 · 2018-03-07T12:02:06Z

@axic General remark: ok, I see, won't use external reviews as full reviews any more. Thought that would suffice (since you guys are all pretty busy atm), sorry. Next time I'll request a classic team dev review again.

axic · 2018-03-07T12:09:32Z

In general I wanted to understand the changes, they all look ok after clarifications above.

holgerd77 added 4 commits March 1, 2018 13:09

Switched dependencies and scripts sections in package.json to align w…

0cd4061

…ith other ethereumjs libraries

Removed browserify section in package.json (not used any more, causin…

d8d5c06

…g 3rd-party build problems)

Added babel build:dist command, switched to dist/index.js main entry …

8c186f4

…point in package.json

Add --dist test option to run tests against dist folder build, switch…

348f0f1

… package.json script cmds to use --dist option

holgerd77 force-pushed the es5-dist branch 3 times, most recently from b4e3a38 to 12d2926 Compare March 1, 2018 15:21

holgerd77 force-pushed the es5-dist branch from 12d2926 to 5d83d04 Compare March 1, 2018 16:16

Added running simple integrity/functionality test to travis for Node …

416e559

…8 and 9

holgerd77 force-pushed the es5-dist branch from 5d83d04 to 416e559 Compare March 1, 2018 16:59

holgerd77 changed the title ~~[WIP] ES5 distribution on npm~~ ES5 distribution on npm Mar 1, 2018

holgerd77 requested review from axic and jwasinger March 1, 2018 18:40

This was referenced Mar 1, 2018

[EXPERIMENT] Build library as an es5 module with rollup and ES6 modules #271

Closed

Remove all ES6 features #274

Closed

holgerd77 merged commit 9bc99c3 into master Mar 6, 2018

holgerd77 deleted the es5-dist branch March 6, 2018 09:42

axic reviewed Mar 7, 2018

View reviewed changes

evertonfraga added the package: vm label Feb 27, 2020

This was referenced Aug 22, 2023

[Snyk] Upgrade sort-package-json from 1.57.0 to 2.5.1 Woodpile37/ethereumjs-monorepo#13

Merged

[Snyk] Upgrade sort-package-json from 1.57.0 to 2.5.1 Woodpile37/ethereumjs-monorepo#43

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

ES5 distribution on npm #281

ES5 distribution on npm #281

holgerd77 commented Mar 1, 2018 •

edited

Loading

coveralls commented Mar 1, 2018 •

edited

Loading

holgerd77 commented Mar 1, 2018 •

edited

Loading

holgerd77 commented Mar 6, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading

axic Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

axic Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 commented Mar 7, 2018

axic commented Mar 7, 2018

ES5 distribution on npm #281

ES5 distribution on npm #281

Conversation

holgerd77 commented Mar 1, 2018 • edited Loading

coveralls commented Mar 1, 2018 • edited Loading

holgerd77 commented Mar 1, 2018 • edited Loading

holgerd77 commented Mar 6, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

holgerd77 commented Mar 7, 2018

axic commented Mar 7, 2018

holgerd77 commented Mar 1, 2018 •

edited

Loading

coveralls commented Mar 1, 2018 •

edited

Loading

holgerd77 commented Mar 1, 2018 •

edited

Loading

holgerd77 Mar 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading