fix(deps): update all non-major dependencies #101

cu-infra-svc-git · 2024-05-13T01:16:52Z

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Change	Age	Adoption	Passing	Confidence
@aws-sdk/client-rds (source)	`^3.568.0` -> `^3.576.0`
@aws-sdk/client-secrets-manager (source)	`^3.568.0` -> `^3.576.0`
esbuild	`^0.20.2` -> `^0.21.2`
jsii-docgen	`^10.4.4` -> `^10.4.9`
jsii-release	`^0.2.828` -> `^0.2.834`

Release Notes

aws/aws-sdk-js-v3 (@aws-sdk/client-rds)

`v3.576.0`

Compare Source

Note: Version bump only for package @aws-sdk/client-rds

`v3.575.0`

Compare Source

Note: Version bump only for package @aws-sdk/client-rds

`v3.574.0`

Compare Source

Note: Version bump only for package @aws-sdk/client-rds

`v3.572.0`

Compare Source

Note: Version bump only for package @aws-sdk/client-rds

aws/aws-sdk-js-v3 (@aws-sdk/client-secrets-manager)

`v3.576.0`

Compare Source

Note: Version bump only for package @aws-sdk/client-secrets-manager

`v3.575.0`

Compare Source

Note: Version bump only for package @aws-sdk/client-secrets-manager

`v3.574.0`

Compare Source

Note: Version bump only for package @aws-sdk/client-secrets-manager

`v3.572.0`

Compare Source

Note: Version bump only for package @aws-sdk/client-secrets-manager

evanw/esbuild (esbuild)

`v0.21.2`

Compare Source

Correct this in field and accessor decorators (#3761)

This release changes the value of this in initializers for class field and accessor decorators from the module-level this value to the appropriate this value for the decorated element (either the class or the instance). It was previously incorrect due to lack of test coverage. Here's an example of a decorator that doesn't work without this change:
```
const dec = () => function() { this.bar = true }
class Foo { @&#8203;dec static foo }
console.log(Foo.bar) // Should be "true"
```
Allow es2023 as a target environment (#3762)

TypeScript recently added es2023 as a compilation target, so esbuild now supports this too. There is no difference between a target of es2022 and es2023 as far as esbuild is concerned since the 2023 edition of JavaScript doesn't introduce any new syntax features.

`v0.21.1`

Compare Source

Fix a regression with --keep-names (#3756)

The previous release introduced a regression with the --keep-names setting and object literals with get/set accessor methods, in which case the generated code contained syntax errors. This release fixes the regression:
```
// Original code
x = { get y() {} }

// Output from version 0.21.0 (with --keep-names)
x = { get y: /* @&#8203;__PURE__ */ __name(function() {
}, "y") };

// Output from this version (with --keep-names)
x = { get y() {
} };
```

`v0.21.0`

Compare Source

This release doesn't contain any deliberately-breaking changes. However, it contains a very complex new feature and while all of esbuild's tests pass, I would not be surprised if an important edge case turns out to be broken. So I'm releasing this as a breaking change release to avoid causing any trouble. As usual, make sure to test your code when you upgrade.

Implement the JavaScript decorators proposal (#104)

With this release, esbuild now contains an implementation of the upcoming JavaScript decorators proposal. This is the same feature that shipped in TypeScript 5.0 and has been highly-requested on esbuild's issue tracker. You can read more about them in that blog post and in this other (now slightly outdated) extensive blog post here: https://2ality.com/2022/10/javascript-decorators.html. Here's a quick example:
```
const log = (fn, context) => function() {
  console.log(`before ${context.name}`)
  const it = fn.apply(this, arguments)
  console.log(`after ${context.name}`)
  return it
}

class Foo {
  @&#8203;log static foo() {
    console.log('in foo')
  }
}

// Logs "before foo", "in foo", "after foo"
Foo.foo()
```
Note that this feature is different than the existing "TypeScript experimental decorators" feature that esbuild already implements. It uses similar syntax but behaves very differently, and the two are not compatible (although it's sometimes possible to write decorators that work with both). TypeScript experimental decorators will still be supported by esbuild going forward as they have been around for a long time, are very widely used, and let you do certain things that are not possible with JavaScript decorators (such as decorating function parameters). By default esbuild will parse and transform JavaScript decorators, but you can tell esbuild to parse and transform TypeScript experimental decorators instead by setting "experimentalDecorators": true in your tsconfig.json file.

Probably at least half of the work for this feature went into creating a test suite that exercises many of the proposal's edge cases: https://github.com/evanw/decorator-tests. It has given me a reasonable level of confidence that esbuild's initial implementation is acceptable. However, I don't have access to a significant sample of real code that uses JavaScript decorators. If you're currently using JavaScript decorators in a real code base, please try out esbuild's implementation and let me know if anything seems off.

⚠️ WARNING ⚠️

This proposal has been in the works for a very long time (work began around 10 years ago in 2014) and it is finally getting close to becoming part of the JavaScript language. However, it's still a work in progress and isn't a part of JavaScript yet, so keep in mind that any code that uses JavaScript decorators may need to be updated as the feature continues to evolve. The decorators proposal is pretty close to its final form but it can and likely will undergo some small behavioral adjustments before it ends up becoming a part of the standard. If/when that happens, I will update esbuild's implementation to match the specification. I will not be supporting old versions of the specification.

Optimize the generated code for private methods

Previously when lowering private methods for old browsers, esbuild would generate one WeakSet for each private method. This mirrors similar logic for generating one WeakSet for each private field. Using a separate WeakMap for private fields is necessary as their assignment can be observable:

let it
class Bar {
  constructor() {
    it = this
  }
}
class Foo extends Bar {
  #x = 1
  #y = null.foo
  static check() {
    console.log(#x in it, #y in it)
  }
}
try { new Foo } catch {}
Foo.check()

This prints true false because this partially-initialized instance has #x but not #y. In other words, it's not true that all class instances will always have all of their private fields. However, the assignment of private methods to a class instance is not observable. In other words, it's true that all class instances will always have all of their private methods. This means esbuild can lower private methods into code where all methods share a single WeakSet, which is smaller, faster, and uses less memory. Other JavaScript processing tools such as the TypeScript compiler already make this optimization. Here's what this change looks like:

// Original code
class Foo {
  #x() { return this.#x() }
  #y() { return this.#y() }
  #z() { return this.#z() }
}

// Old output (--supported:class-private-method=false)
var _x, x_fn, _y, y_fn, _z, z_fn;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __privateAdd(this, _x);
    __privateAdd(this, _y);
    __privateAdd(this, _z);
  }
}
_x = new WeakSet();
x_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _x, x_fn).call(this);
};
_y = new WeakSet();
y_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _y, y_fn).call(this);
};
_z = new WeakSet();
z_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _z, z_fn).call(this);
};

// New output (--supported:class-private-method=false)
var _Foo_instances, x_fn, y_fn, z_fn;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __privateAdd(this, _Foo_instances);
  }
}
_Foo_instances = new WeakSet();
x_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _Foo_instances, x_fn).call(this);
};
y_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _Foo_instances, y_fn).call(this);
};
z_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _Foo_instances, z_fn).call(this);
};

Fix an obscure bug with lowering class members with computed property keys

When class members that use newer syntax features are transformed for older target environments, they sometimes need to be relocated. However, care must be taken to not reorder any side effects caused by computed property keys. For example, the following code must evaluate a() then b() then c():
```
class Foo {
  [a()]() {}
  [b()];
  static { c() }
}
```
Previously esbuild did this by shifting the computed property key forward to the next spot in the evaluation order. Classes evaluate all computed keys first and then all static class elements, so if the last computed key needs to be shifted, esbuild previously inserted a static block at start of the class body, ensuring it came before all other static class elements:
```
var _a;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __publicField(this, _a);
  }
  static {
    _a = b();
  }
  [a()]() {
  }
  static {
    c();
  }
}
```
However, this could cause esbuild to accidentally generate a syntax error if the computed property key contains code that isn't allowed in a static block, such as an await expression. With this release, esbuild fixes this problem by shifting the computed property key backward to the previous spot in the evaluation order instead, which may push it into the extends clause or even before the class itself:
```
// Original code
class Foo {
  [a()]() {}
  [await b()];
  static { c() }
}

// Old output (with --supported:class-field=false)
var _a;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __publicField(this, _a);
  }
  static {
    _a = await b();
  }
  [a()]() {
  }
  static {
    c();
  }
}

// New output (with --supported:class-field=false)
var _a, _b;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __publicField(this, _a);
  }
  [(_b = a(), _a = await b(), _b)]() {
  }
  static {
    c();
  }
}
```
Fix some --keep-names edge cases

The NamedEvaluation syntax-directed operation in the JavaScript specification gives certain anonymous expressions a name property depending on where they are in the syntax tree. For example, the following initializers convey a name value:
```
var foo = function() {}
var bar = class {}
console.log(foo.name, bar.name)
```
When you enable esbuild's --keep-names setting, esbuild generates additional code to represent this NamedEvaluation operation so that the value of the name property persists even when the identifiers are renamed (e.g. due to minification).

However, I recently learned that esbuild's implementation of NamedEvaluation is missing a few cases. Specifically esbuild was missing property definitions, class initializers, logical-assignment operators. These cases should now all be handled:
```
var obj = { foo: function() {} }
class Foo0 { foo = function() {} }
class Foo1 { static foo = function() {} }
class Foo2 { accessor foo = function() {} }
class Foo3 { static accessor foo = function() {} }
foo ||= function() {}
foo &&= function() {}
foo ??= function() {}
```

deps: upgrade dependencies (#1409) (75231b5)

deps: upgrade dependencies (#1184) (29642d6)

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "before 2am on Monday" (UTC), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

👻 Immortal: This PR will be recreated if closed unmerged. Get config help if that's undesired.

If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

This PR has been generated by Renovate Bot.

codecov · 2024-05-13T01:19:32Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.49%. Comparing base (cf656b1) to head (7d5faf6).

❗ Current head 7d5faf6 differs from pull request most recent head 7d1a876. Consider uploading reports for the commit 7d1a876 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #101   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.49%   96.49%           
=======================================
  Files           6        6           
  Lines        1710     1710           
  Branches      187      187           
=======================================
  Hits         1650     1650           
  Misses         60       60

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update cf656b1...7d1a876. Read the comment docs.

cu-infra-svc-git added the renovate label May 13, 2024

cu-infra-svc-git force-pushed the renovate/all-minor-patch branch from 6271e57 to bfaa1c2 Compare May 14, 2024 01:16

fix(deps): update all non-major dependencies

7d5faf6

cu-infra-svc-git force-pushed the renovate/all-minor-patch branch from bfaa1c2 to 7d5faf6 Compare May 15, 2024 01:16

Merge branch 'main' into renovate/all-minor-patch

7d1a876

ahammond enabled auto-merge (squash) May 15, 2024 19:12

ahammond approved these changes May 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

ahammond merged commit ab1d94b into main May 15, 2024
7 checks passed

ahammond deleted the renovate/all-minor-patch branch May 15, 2024 19:15

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix(deps): update all non-major dependencies #101

fix(deps): update all non-major dependencies #101

cu-infra-svc-git commented May 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented May 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

fix(deps): update all non-major dependencies #101

fix(deps): update all non-major dependencies #101

Conversation

cu-infra-svc-git commented May 13, 2024 • edited Loading

Release Notes

10.4.9 (2024-05-14)

Bug Fixes

10.4.8 (2024-05-09)

Bug Fixes

10.4.7 (2024-05-08)

Bug Fixes

10.4.6 (2024-05-07)

Bug Fixes

10.4.5 (2024-05-06)

Bug Fixes

0.2.834 (2024-05-14)

Bug Fixes

0.2.833 (2024-05-12)

Bug Fixes

0.2.832 (2024-05-11)

Bug Fixes

0.2.831 (2024-05-09)

Bug Fixes

0.2.830 (2024-05-08)

Bug Fixes

0.2.829 (2024-05-06)

Bug Fixes

Configuration

codecov bot commented May 13, 2024 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

cu-infra-svc-git commented May 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented May 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading