feat: compatible codeSplitting config with umi

[xusd320]

Compatible mako codeSplitting config for umi/codeSplitting

Summary by CodeRabbit

• 新功能
  • 引入了更灵活的代码拆分配置，支持不同的策略（细粒度、先进和自动）。
• Bug 修复
  • 更新了构建后 JavaScript 文件内容验证的断言，反映了文件命名约定的重组。
• 文档
  • 更新了 Mako 打包器的配置以增强代码拆分功能的可配置性。

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

该拉取请求对代码拆分和优化过程进行了重要修改，主要集中在 optimize_chunk 方法的控制流程上。具体而言，optimize_chunk_size 阶段的顺序被重新安排，以确保其在 optimize_name_suffix 阶段之后调用。此外，expect.js 文件中的断言也进行了更新，以反映文件命名约定的变化。最后，index.js 文件的代码拆分配置被重构，以支持更灵活的策略设置。

Changes

文件路径	更改摘要
crates/mako/src/generate/optimize_chunk.rs	调整了 optimize_chunk 方法中的优化阶段顺序，确保 optimize_chunk_size 在 optimize_name_suffix 之后调用，并将 min_module_size 字段替换为 min_package_size。
e2e/fixtures/code-splitting.granular/expect.js	更新了多个断言中的文件名，以反映新的文件命名约定，并增加了对字符串 "normal" 的检查。
packages/bundler-mako/index.js	重构了代码拆分配置，支持基于 jsStrategy 属性的灵活策略设置，移除了硬编码的配置。
crates/mako/src/config/code_splitting.rs	将 ChunkGroup 结构中的字段 min_module_size 重命名为 min_package_size，并更新了默认实现。
crates/mako/src/plugins/ssu.rs	在 SUPlus 结构中替换了 min_module_size 字段为 min_package_size，并优化了错误处理和状态管理逻辑。

Possibly related PRs

• fix(bundler-mako): config mako.plugins should work #1400: 此PR修改了 makoConfig，与主要PR中的 min_package_size 字段相关，涉及块优化的配置管理。
• fix: not deasync small async chunk #1435: 此PR修改了 optimize_chunk.rs 文件，直接与主要PR中的 optimize_chunk 方法相关，专注于块优化逻辑。
• perf: optimize group_chunks, speed up group_chunks by 500% #1475: 此PR影响了 optimize_chunk.rs 文件，特别是在块处理方式上，与主要PR中的优化阶段重排相一致。
• refactor: code splitting config #1629: 此PR包含对 optimize_chunk.rs 文件的更改，特别是与块优化相关的枚举和结构的重命名和重构，与主要PR中的 ChunkGroup 结构相关。
• fix: should not re-group when span changed #1654: 此PR涉及对 update.rs 文件的更改，相关性在于讨论依赖管理和模块关系的处理，类似于主要PR中 optimize_chunk.rs 文件的更改。

Suggested reviewers

• sorrycc
• stormslowly

🐇 在代码的世界里跳跃，
优化块，重构不再愁。
文件名随风而变，
灵活配置，策略多变。
让我们一起欢庆这变化，
兔子们的代码舞蹈！ 🎉

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)

crates/mako/src/generate/optimize_chunk.rs (1)

Line range hint 1-1000: 代码结构建议优化

代码整体实现较为复杂，建议进行以下优化：

1. 文档完善：

   • 建议为主要的优化策略添加详细的文档注释，说明其使用场景和优化目标
   • 关键算法（如 chunk 大小优化）需要添加实现原理说明

2. 错误处理优化：

   • panic!("Duplicated chunk: {}", &info_chunk_id.id) 建议改为返回 Result
   • 建议添加更多的错误场景处理

3. 代码重构建议：

   • optimize_chunk_size 方法过长，建议拆分为多个子函数
   • 可以考虑将优化策略抽象为独立的 trait

建议将 optimize_chunk_size 重构如下：

- fn optimize_chunk_size(&self, optimize_chunks_infos: &mut Vec<OptimizeChunksInfo>) {
+ fn optimize_chunk_size(&self, optimize_chunks_infos: &mut Vec<OptimizeChunksInfo>) -> Result<(), ChunkError> {
+     self.calculate_chunk_sizes(optimize_chunks_infos)?;
+     self.apply_size_constraints(optimize_chunks_infos)?;
+     self.split_oversized_chunks(optimize_chunks_infos)?;
+     Ok(())
+ }

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 8a2f4d0 and be7cd89.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

• crates/mako/src/generate/optimize_chunk.rs (1 hunks)
• e2e/fixtures/code-splitting.granular/expect.js (1 hunks)
• packages/bundler-mako/index.js (2 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (2)

e2e/fixtures/code-splitting.granular/expect.js (1)

13-20: 文件命名模式的更改符合预期

测试用例中的文件命名模式已更新，移除了数字前缀（如 lib_0_），使其更加简洁。这个改动与 Umi 的代码分割配置保持一致，同时保持了原有的功能验证逻辑不变。

运行以下脚本验证新的文件命名约定是否在其他测试用例中保持一致：

✅ Verification successful

文件命名模式更改已验证完成

通过检查代码库，我们发现：

• 新的命名模式（lib_lib1-async.js、lib_lib2-async.js、lib_shared1-async.js、lib_shared2-async.js）仅在 e2e/fixtures/code-splitting.granular/expect.js 文件中使用
• 这些更改是独立且局部的，不会影响其他测试用例
• 测试断言的功能逻辑保持不变，仅调整了文件命名约定

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 描述：检查其他测试用例中的文件命名模式
# 预期：新的命名模式应该在相关测试中保持一致

# 搜索所有包含旧命名模式的测试文件
rg -l "lib_[0-9]+_.*-async\.js" "e2e/fixtures"

Length of output: 46

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 搜索所有包含 lib_lib 或 lib_shared 模式的测试文件
rg -l "lib_(lib|shared)[0-9]+-async\.js" "e2e/fixtures"

# 检查代码分割相关的测试文件内容
fd "expect.js" "e2e/fixtures" -t f -E "node_modules" --exec rg -l "lib_.*-async\.js" {}

Length of output: 235

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 检查代码分割测试文件的完整内容，以了解命名模式的上下文
cat e2e/fixtures/code-splitting.granular/expect.js

# 检查相关的测试用例实现
fd -t f -e js "code-splitting.granular" "e2e/fixtures" --exec cat {}

Length of output: 1326

crates/mako/src/generate/optimize_chunk.rs (1)

49-51: 优化阶段顺序调整需要验证影响

优化阶段的执行顺序已调整，将 optimize_chunk_size 移至 optimize_name_suffix 之后。这个改动可能会影响最终的代码分割结果，建议验证以下几点：

1. 分割后的代码块大小是否仍然符合预期
2. 代码块的命名是否仍然保持一致性
3. 是否会对热更新性能产生影响

✅ Verification successful

Let me gather more information about the implementation details of these optimization functions to better understand their dependencies and potential impacts.

---

优化阶段顺序调整是安全的

通过分析代码实现，可以确认这个顺序调整是安全的，原因如下：

• optimize_name_suffix 只负责根据策略（包名或依赖哈希）对chunk进行命名和分组，不会影响chunk的大小计算
• optimize_chunk_size 主要处理chunk的大小优化，包括分割过大的chunk和移除过小的chunk，其实现不依赖于chunk的命名方式
• 两个函数都是独立工作的，它们通过 optimize_chunks_infos 共享数据，但对数据的修改是互不干扰的

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 验证代码分割结果的一致性
# 1. 检查是否存在相关的测试用例
rg -l "optimize_chunk.*test" 

# 2. 检查是否有其他依赖于优化顺序的代码
rg "optimize_(chunk_size|name_suffix)"

Length of output: 555

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 检查optimize_chunk_size和optimize_name_suffix的具体实现
ast-grep --pattern 'fn optimize_chunk_size($$$) {
  $$$
}'

ast-grep --pattern 'fn optimize_name_suffix($$$) {
  $$$
}'

# 检查是否有其他文件引用这些方法
rg -A 3 "optimize_chunk_size|optimize_name_suffix" --type rust

Length of output: 21543

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Please upload report for BASE (master@8a2f4d0). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
crates/mako/src/generate/optimize_chunk.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #1669   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   55.59%           
=========================================
  Files             ?      173           
  Lines             ?    17508           
  Branches          ?        0           
=========================================
  Hits              ?     9733           
  Misses            ?     7775           
  Partials          ?        0           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)

crates/mako/src/config/code_splitting.rs (1)

88-88: 建议为字段添加文档注释

为了提高代码的可维护性，建议添加文档注释来说明此字段的用途、单位和使用场景。

建议添加如下文档：

    #[serde(default)]
+   /// 包大小的最小阈值（以字节为单位）
+   /// 当包的大小小于此阈值时，它将被合并到其他chunk中
    pub min_package_size: Option<usize>,

crates/mako/src/plugins/ssu.rs (2)

Line range hint 279-307: 建议优化缓存机制的实现

当前缓存实现在处理依赖关系时可以进行以下改进：

1. 建议将魔法字符串提取为常量
2. 可以增加错误重试机制
3. 建议添加缓存过期策略

建议重构如下：

+ const CACHE_VERSION: &str = "1";
+ const MAX_RETRY_ATTEMPTS: i32 = 3;
+ const CACHE_TTL_DAYS: i64 = 7;

  fn write_current_cache_state(&self, context: &Arc<Context>) -> Result<()> {
      let cache_file = context.root.join("node_modules/.cache_mako/meta.json");
+     let cache = self.current_state.lock().unwrap();
+     let cache_data = CacheData {
+         version: CACHE_VERSION.to_string(),
+         created_at: chrono::Utc::now(),
+         data: (*cache).clone(),
+     };
-     let cache = self.current_state.lock().unwrap();
-     fs::write(cache_file, serde_json::to_string(&*cache).unwrap())?;
+     fs::write(cache_file, serde_json::to_string(&cache_data)?)?;
      Ok(())
  }

---

Line range hint 309-319: 建议增强错误处理机制

当前的错误处理使用了 if let 语法，但可以更加健壮：

1. 建议添加详细的错误信息
2. 考虑区分不同类型的错误情况

建议修改如下：

  fn load_cached_state(&self, context: &Arc<Context>) -> Option<CacheState> {
      let cache_file = context.root.join("node_modules/.cache_mako/meta.json");
-     if let Ok(content) = fs::read_to_string(cache_file)
-         && let Ok(disk_cache) = serde_json::from_str(&content)
-     {
-         return Some(disk_cache);
-     }
+     match fs::read_to_string(&cache_file) {
+         Ok(content) => match serde_json::from_str(&content) {
+             Ok(disk_cache) => Some(disk_cache),
+             Err(e) => {
+                 debug!("缓存解析失败: {}", e);
+                 None
+             }
+         },
+         Err(e) => {
+             debug!("读取缓存文件失败: {}", e);
+             None
+         }
+     }
-     None
  }

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between be7cd89 and a6f356b.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)

• crates/mako/src/config/code_splitting.rs (2 hunks)
• crates/mako/src/generate/optimize_chunk.rs (4 hunks)
• crates/mako/src/plugins/ssu.rs (2 hunks)
• e2e/fixtures/code-splitting.granular/expect.js (1 hunks)
• packages/bundler-mako/index.js (2 hunks)

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)

• crates/mako/src/generate/optimize_chunk.rs
• e2e/fixtures/code-splitting.granular/expect.js

🔇 Additional comments (3)

crates/mako/src/config/code_splitting.rs (1)

88-88: 字段重命名是一个破坏性更改

将 min_module_size 重命名为 min_package_size 使配置与 Umi 保持一致是个好的改动，但这是一个破坏性更改。建议在发布说明中标注此更改。

✅ Verification successful

字段重命名已正确实施且用法一致

代码库中所有使用该配置字段的地方都已更新为 min_package_size，包括默认配置、SSU 插件和代码分块优化逻辑。这个破坏性更改已经在整个代码库中得到了一致的实施。

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 检查是否有其他文件仍在使用旧的字段名
rg "min_module_size" 

Length of output: 258

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 检查这些文件的内容以确定它们是否是测试文件或示例代码
cat e2e/fixtures/code-splitting.granular/node_modules/lib1/index.js
cat e2e/fixtures/code-splitting.granular/node_modules/lib2/index.js

# 检查是否有其他使用此配置的代码
rg -A 3 "CodeSplittingConfig" 

Length of output: 380130

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 检查是否有其他配置文件或测试文件使用此配置
rg -A 3 "min_module_size|min_package_size" --type rust

Length of output: 1917

crates/mako/src/plugins/ssu.rs (1)

174-174: 配置字段更新符合 umi 规范

将 min_module_size 更改为 min_package_size 使配置与 umi 的代码分割配置保持一致。这个改动反映了从模块级别到包级别的粒度转变。

执行以下脚本验证配置兼容性：

Also applies to: 185-185

✅ Verification successful

配置字段更新已完成且实现正确

代码库中的 min_module_size 已全面更新为 min_package_size，且更新涵盖了所有相关实现：

• 配置定义（config/code_splitting.rs）
• 插件实现（plugins/ssu.rs）
• 分块优化逻辑（generate/optimize_chunk.rs）

e2e 测试文件中的注释提及 min_module_size 不影响功能，仅作为文档说明。

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 描述：验证代码库中是否还存在 min_module_size 的使用
rg "min_module_size" 

Length of output: 258

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# 检查代码分割相关的配置和测试用例
rg -A 5 "min_package_size|min_module_size" --type rust

# 检查测试文件中的相关配置
fd -e rs test -x rg -l "min_package_size|min_module_size" {}

Length of output: 2808

packages/bundler-mako/index.js (1)

629-629: 配置项使用正确

codeSplitting 配置项已正确集成到 makoConfig 对象中。