fix(linter): jsx no undef match scope should check with ancestors

[xxleyi]

when check undef in jsx-no-undef rule, the match one should be scope of current jsx or the ancestors scope of current jsx. cause I just begin to learn rust, I am not sure the code style and performance can be better, if there is any, I would change

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #2027 will not alter performance

_{⚠️ No base runs were found}

_{Falling back to comparing xxleyi:fix-lint-jsx-no-undef (880b46f) with main (ab8a311)}

Summary

✅ 17 untouched benchmarks

[Boshen]

I'm not sure whether enumerating the symbol table is a good idea, @Dunqing can you double check and find a better way?

[Dunqing]

If too many symbols with the same name in the symbol table, enumerating the symbol table will affect performance. Instead, we should need to access the ancestor of the node's scope_id.

Look like this

for scope_id in ctx.scopes().ancestors(jsx_scope_id) {
    if ctx.scopes().has_binding(scope_id, &ident.name) {
        return;
    }
}
ctx.diagnostic(JsxNoUndefDiagnostic(ident.name.clone(), ident.span));

Usually, the Component is defined or imported from other files in the root scope, So we can do a small optimization by checking if the binding is present in the root scope first.

Also, your test case is incorrect, the App variable is defined in terms of var, so the App variable can be accessed after { var App; }.

var React; { var App; }; React.render(<App />);

You should change the var App; to let App;

[xxleyi]

If too many symbols with the same name in the symbol table, enumerating the symbol table will affect performance. Instead, we should need to access the ancestor of the node's scope_id.

Look like this

for scope_id in ctx.scopes().ancestors(jsx_scope_id) {
    if ctx.scopes().has_binding(scope_id, &ident.name) {
        return;
    }
}
ctx.diagnostic(JsxNoUndefDiagnostic(ident.name.clone(), ident.span));

Usually, the Component is defined or imported from other files in the root scope, So we can do a small optimization by checking if the binding is present in the root scope first.

Also, your test case is incorrect, the App variable is defined in terms of var, so the App variable can be accessed after { var App; }.

var React; { var App; }; React.render(<App />);

You should change the var App; to let App;

Oh, I got your explanation, will change my PR.

[Dunqing]

Thank you!