ref(core)!: Remove backwards compatible SentryCarrier type #14697
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
size-limit report 📦
|
mydea
commented
Dec 13, 2024
| import { SDK_VERSION } from './version'; | ||
|
|
||
| interface SentryCarrier { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this type was basically duplicated here - this comes from the days of core vs utils separation, I believe 😬
mydea
commented
Dec 13, 2024
| export function getGlobalSingleton<T>(name: keyof SentryCarrier, creator: () => T, obj?: unknown): T { | ||
| const gbl = (obj || GLOBAL_OBJ) as InternalGlobal; | ||
| const __SENTRY__ = (gbl.__SENTRY__ = gbl.__SENTRY__ || {}); | ||
| export function getGlobalSingleton<Prop extends keyof SentryCarrier>( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Made this more type safe and actually inferring types correctly for passed in stuff!
mydea
force-pushed
the
fn/cleanup-old-carrier-code
branch
from
95a71c1 to
30d32a5
Compare
❌ 12 Tests Failed:
View the top 3 failed tests by shortest run time
To view more test analytics, go to the Test Analytics Dashboard |
mydea
force-pushed
the
fn/cleanup-old-carrier-code
branch
from
30d32a5 to
753d1f0
Compare
mydea
force-pushed
the
fn/cleanup-old-carrier-code
branch
from
753d1f0 to
5860651
Compare
I do not really think this is breaking or has any impact on any user code, but to be on the safe side, we can remove this in v9.
mydea
force-pushed
the
fn/cleanup-old-carrier-code
branch
from
d37b8c9 to
6cbe609
Compare
Lms24
approved these changes
Dec 16, 2024
Comment on lines
+77
to
+78
| const __SENTRY__ = (obj.__SENTRY__ = obj.__SENTRY__ || {}); | ||
| const carrier = (__SENTRY__[SDK_VERSION] = __SENTRY__[SDK_VERSION] || {}); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
l: we could call getSentryCarrier(obj) here to save some bytes, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
actually no 😬 I had that first but it broke loader tests. This is why I added the comment below - if we'd call that, it would already set the version, which would lead to stuff thinking the SDK is set up, when it isn't. We store e.g. the default global/isolation scope on there even before the SDK is setup, so we need to ensure the version is not set here yet!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(on the plus side, the loader tests are good! xD)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ah sorry, I should have read the comment 🤦 thanks!
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.
I do not really think this is breaking or has any impact on any user code, but to be on the safe side, we can remove this in v9.
The one actual breaking thing is to also move the
encodePolyfill/decodePolyfillcode to the versioned carrier - this was before still on the global, making this a bit harder than necessary. In v9, this will have to be set on the versioned carrier the same as other things - cc @krystofwoldrich