fix(renamings): Small correction to renaming of Blockly.utils.global
#6599
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
It doesn't make any difference in practice to the behaviour of the renamings script, but this entry in renamings.json5 was slightly mis-specified, and only works properly because this former module had only a singe export. Also remove some unnecessary quoting of keywords.
maribethb
approved these changes
Nov 14, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The basics
npm run formatandnpm run lintThe details
Resolves
A small error in the entry for
Blockly.utils.global, that failed to account for the fact that this (former) module had a named export.Proposed Changes
Adjust the entry to make it clear that
globalThiswas a named export, not the default export.Also remove some unnecessary quoting of keywords.
Behaviour Before Change
It would have worked anyway.
Behaviour After Change
It will work correctly, and now for the right reason.
Reason for Changes
I am pedantic.
Additional Information
This change doesn't make any difference in practice to the behaviour of the renamings script, so there is no reason to push it to
masterimmediately for the benefit of the renamings script.