feat(cli): generate multiple outputs to different files in a single c… #2011
Conversation
albertored
force-pushed
the
feat/cli/multiple-output-one-call
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8f94078
to
2471805
Compare
|
I think we could simplify this even more by keeping the existing options with some extra syntax support:
WDYT @P0lip @albertored? |
|
@fgreinacher However, I'm not certain about the syntax for the output if we went with the above convention. |
|
@fgreinacher I also like it, it is similar to the one I originally suggested in the issue but more clear. |
I think @P0lip should have the last call on this 😀 |
Yes, sure, I forgot to tag him |
|
@albertored go for it if you have spare time! Thanks a lot for putting all the effort into it. |
albertored
force-pushed
the
feat/cli/multiple-output-one-call
branch
from
2471805
to
7cfae07
Compare
|
@P0lip @fgreinacher done, let me know what do you think, the logic for handling those options is quite complex. I also have a lint error that I'm not able to fix... |
| expect(writeOutput).nthCalledWith(1, '<formatted output>', undefined); | ||
| expect(writeOutput).nthCalledWith(2, '<formatted output>', 'foo.json'); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we test error cases here? For example:
--format json,junit --output results.txt(output needs to include format)--format json --output junit:results.xml(unselected format in output)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, I was waiting to have a feedback on the implementation first
| @@ -20,8 +20,8 @@ Options: | |||
| --version Show version number [boolean] | |||
| --help Show help [boolean] | |||
| -e, --encoding text encoding to use [string] [choices: "utf8", "ascii", "utf-8", "utf16le", "ucs2", "ucs-2", "base64", "latin1"] [default: "utf8"] | |||
| -f, --format formatter to use for outputting results [string] [choices: "json", "stylish", "junit", "html", "text", "teamcity", "pretty"] [default: "stylish"] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't really like that we lost the choices in the help text.
Wondering whether it would be easier (implementation- and usage-wise) to allow multiple --format and --output parameters instead of the providing multiple values within one parameter, e.g. --format stylish --format junit --output junit:junit.xml instead of of --format stylish,junit --output junit:junit.xml.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Initially, I was looking at having --format json junit but yargs does not behave well with array arguments together with positional ones.
Repeating the --format flag is completely doable instead
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We could also consider https://github.com/yargs/yargs/blob/main/docs/tricks.md#objects to make the implementation even easier (e.g. --output.junit junit.xml)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yup, it feels like using objects might be a good idea for outputs.
I'm trying to explore how invasive changing the type of format option would be.
It feels like we'd need to consider it a breaking change if we changed the type of the option, as yargs would need to be instrumented with -- to stop the parsing, or, alternatively, pass format after the positional arguments.
|
Closing this one as we've already merged #2037. |
Fixes #1970 .
Checklist
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?