Develop Reference

Parcel Bundler beautify, lint, and create .min.js

I'm new the world of automating/testing/bunding with JS and I've got parcel setup for the most part but I noticed that when it builds files, it does not actually save them with the .min.js part in the file name. I'm wondering if theres a way to do this without having to rename the build file manually.
I'm also trying to find a way to have parcel go through the original source files(the ones that you work on) and lint and beautify them for me
Here's what my package.json looks like
{
"name": "lpac",
"version": "1.3.1",
"description": "",
"dependencies": {},
"devDependencies": {
"parcel": "^2.0.0-rc.0"
},
"scripts": {
"watch": "parcel watch --no-hmr",
"build": "parcel build"
},
"targets": {
"lite-maps": {
"source": ["./path/file1.js", "./path/file2.js", "./path/file3.js"],
"distDir": "./path/build/"
}
},
"browserslist": "> 0.5%, last 2 versions, not dead",
"outputFormat" : "global",
}
I checked out the docs but I couldn't find anything on linting or beautifying with parcel. How can i go about doing that? If you have tutorial links to doing so please also share because resources/tutorials seem scarce for anything other than the basic watching and building files

Unfortunately, there is no out-of-the-box setting that can cause parcel javascript output look like [fileName].[hash].min.js instead of [fileName].[hash].js. The .min.js extension is just a convention to keep output files distinct from source files, though - it has no effect at runtime - and the fact that parcel does automatic content hashing makes it easy enough to tell this. And even though they don't have a .min.js extension, these output files are definitely still minified and optimized by default.
However, if you really, really want this anyways, it's relatively simple to write a Namer plugin for parcel that adds .min.js to all javascript output:
Here's the code:
import { Namer } from "#parcel/plugin";
import path from "path";
export default new Namer({
name({ bundle }) {
if (bundle.type === "js") {
const filePath = bundle.getMainEntry()?.filePath;
if (filePath) {
let baseNameWithoutExtension = path.basename(filePath, path.extname(filePath));
// See: https://parceljs.org/plugin-system/namer/#content-hashing
if (!bundle.needsStableName) {
baseNameWithoutExtension += "." + bundle.hashReference;
}
return `${baseNameWithoutExtension}.min.js`;
}
}
// Returning null means parcel will keep the name of non-js bundles the same.
return null;
},
});
Then, supposing the above code was published in a package called parcel-namer-js-min, you would add it to your parcel pipeline with this .parcelrc:
{
"extends": "#parcel/config-default",
"namers": ["parcel-namer-js-min", "..."]
}
Here is an example repo where this is working.
The answer to your second question (is there "a way to have parcel go through the original source files(the ones that you work on) and lint and beautify them for me") is unfortunately, no.
However, parcel can work well side-by-side with other command line tools that do this do this. For example, I have most of my projects set up with a format command in the package.json, that looks like this:
{
...
"scripts": {
...
"format": "prettier --write src/**/* -u --no-error-on-unmatched-pattern"
}
...
{
You can easily make that command automatically run for git commits and pushes with husky.

Next.js Scripts Error: Cannot find module '../../webpack-runtime.js'

I want to create RSS script using Next.js.
So I put up a script in a subfolder inside the root folder scripts/ & named it build-rss.js
next.config.js
module.exports = {
webpack: (config, options) => {
config.module.rules.push({
test: /\.svg$/,
issuer: { and: [/\.(js|ts|md)x?$/] },
use: [
{
loader: '#svgr/webpack',
options: {
prettier: false,
svgo: true,
svgoConfig: { plugins: [{ removeViewBox: false }] },
titleProp: true,
},
},
],
})
if (!options.dev && options.isServer) {
const originalEntry = config.entry
config.entry = async () => {
const entries = { ...(await originalEntry()) }
entries['./scripts/build-rss'] = './scripts/build-rss.js'
return entries
}
}
if (!options.isServer) {
config.resolve.fallback.fs = false
}
return config
},
}
When I try to run my script npm run build:development which in package.json represents:
"scripts": {
"clean": "rimraf .next",
"dev": "next dev",
"export": "next export",
"start": "next start",
"lint": "next lint",
"build:development": "next build && npm run export && npm run rss:development",
"build": "next build && npm run export && npm run rss",
"rss:development": "node ./.next/server/scripts/build-rss.js",
"rss": "node ./.next/serverless/scripts/build-rss.js"
}
It throws an error saying:
Error: Cannot find module '../../webpack-runtime.js'
But I checked. The file does exist.
The blunder is this used to work earlier. Probably few versions ago when my other project used the same combination.
I have made a complete reproduction showcasing the error → https://github.com/deadcoder0904/next-script-rss-error
Just clone it, install it & try the script npm run build:development in the terminal to see the error.

Based on our conversation:
entry: path.join(__dirname, '..', 'path/to/file')
That's what a webpack entry looks like. It can also be an array or an object:
entry: [
path.join(__dirname, '..', 'path/to/file'),
// other entries here
]
Whereas you're already getting the whole webpack config:
webpack: (config, options)
So doing:
const originalEntry = config.entry
config.entry = async () => {
const entries = { ...(await originalEntry()) }
entries['./scripts/build-rss'] = './scripts/build-rss.js'
return entries
}
Makes no sense to me if you can just do:
config.entry.push('./scripts/build-rss')
// config.entry['./scripts/build-rss'] = './scripts/build-rss.js'
Unless I miss something with how nextjs is loading the webpack config.
Even then I'd suggest that you use path.join in order to ensure it's loaded to the correct location, because that relative root will execute from wherever webpack is compiled from.
Along with that in your first project you used nextjs v10 and now you're using nextjs v11, which has an upgrade from webpack 4 to 5, which is a major upgrade. I don't know the details, I can only speculate, but under no conditions should you assume that "because your previous project was working this one should using the same stuff", it won't necessarily (especially not in this case).
The first intuitive thing I thought was that webpack should by default bundle everything to a single output file, unless the configuration for that was changed by nextjs (I don't know). So using a script you added to entries didn't make sense to me, because it wouldn't exist. But you're saying that it does exist so I can only assume that webpack is configured to do code splitting and outputs each entry to a different file. In which case I have no idea. As far as I'm aware in webpack 5 (I don't know about webpack 4) code splitting is disabled in dev and enabled in production so your problem is likely a discrepancy between dev and production.
Perhaps the last thing you can try is to change your !options.dev, because right now you're only adding that script when it's production but you're trying to run the script using development.
If you really just have to get it working you can downgrade your nextjs to the previous version you were using (v10), even though that's not really a solution.
Other than that I'm out of ideas.

Not sure if you are still looking for an answer, but simply changing the webpack entry as follows seems to have fixed the problem.
entries['scripts/build-rss'] = './scripts/build-rss.js';
// instead of entries['./scripts/build-rss']

I had the same Error! I deleted the .next Folder and did an npm run dev, It started to work for me!

Material-UI have different style result in production mode?

I am writing a React app that uses server-side rendering. I am following the instruction here to set up a file.
Here is my .babelrc configuration file
{
"presets": [
[
"#babel/preset-env",
{
"useBuiltIns": "usage",
"corejs": { "version": 3, "proposals": true },
"targets": {
"browsers": "> 1%, not ie 11, not op_mini all",
"node": 13
}
}
],
"#babel/preset-react"
],
"plugins": [
"#babel/plugin-proposal-class-properties",
"#babel/plugin-transform-runtime",
[
"import",
{
"libraryName": "#material-ui/icons",
"libraryDirectory": "utils", // default: lib
"camel2DashComponentName": false // default: true
},
"#material-ui/icons"
]
]
}
And this is webpack.config.js file
const path = require("path");
const nodeExternals = require("webpack-node-externals");
const commonConfig = {
devtool: "source-map",
module: {
rules: [{ test: /\.js$/, exclude: /node_modules/, loader: "babel-loader" }]
},
resolve: {
alias: {
"#material-ui/core": "#material-ui/core/es"
}
}
};
module.exports = [
{
...commonConfig,
entry: "./src/client",
output: {
path: path.resolve(__dirname, "public")
}
},
{
...commonConfig,
target: "node",
entry: "./src/server",
output: {
path: path.resolve(__dirname, "server")
},
externals: [nodeExternals()]
}
];
(Here is the full code in CodeSandBox and here is in Github if you want to try out)
The problem appear is when I bundle up the file, in development mode, everything work just fine. But when I try production mode, the CSS part starts to behave weirdly. When the file is first loaded from localhost, it is styled correctly (this happens in a very short time), then the style goes wrong as some styling is missing.
When I try to investigate, I find that all the style that is missing is the part I wrote with makeStyles(). All the built-in styles work just fine.
I tried to remove all the resolve property in webpack.config.js following this post, but it doesn't work. No matter what I try to change that property, nothing happens.
So now the only way I found that can make the app work in production build is to remove the code that removes the styling file (you can find that part at the end of client.js file), but I'm not sure what is the result of doing so.
So my questions are:
What can you suggest the fix for the app?
Why there is such a difference between two modes, development and production? I get that the production mode will include some minification, tree shaking, etc., and the development has most of that except for minification. So why there is a difference?
Edit: I found two possible and workable fixes for this bug: one is to stop removing those CSS files (code that I wrote in client.js file); the other one is to remove the nodeExternal() plugin in webpack.config.js and bundle everything for the server file. What do you think ?

I had a similar issue, although without server-side rendering. It was caused by a different order of stylesheets in dev and prod environments, causing unwanted overwrites. In dev env all stylesheets created by makeStyles() were injected after ALL MUI stylesheets, but in production they were mixed.
Solution:
Add an option: { index: 1 } to all makeStyles() invocations, in order to place those sheets after the MUI sheets which have an index of 0 (by default). This optional argument is passed directly to underlying JSS's jss.createStyleSheet() and dictates the injection order:
const useStyles = makeStyles(
(...), // styles
{ index: 1 }, // optional argument for JSS, to set position after MUI stylesheets
)
(after: https://stackoverflow.com/a/62646041/624597)

How to setup VSCode to debug a webpack bundled nodejs server

I have a nodejs express application, which I'm attempting to bundle with webpack 4 (plus babel 7.1.0). I've followed some of the setup from these two articles:
Webpack Javascript Bundling for Both Front-end and Back-end (nodejs)
Creating a server bundle with Webpack for universal rendering
I can build and run the server once bundled, but I'd like to be able to debug it using VS Code's debug environment.
I've tried the following combination of webpack and vscode config, but it doesn't set breakpoints or let me step into the code.
.vscode/launch.json
{
"type": "node",
"request": "launch",
"name": "bundle-server.js",
"program": "${workspaceFolder}\\bundle-server.js",
"sourceMaps": true,
"smartStep": true,
}
webpack-server.config.js
const path = require('path');
const nodeExternals = require('webpack-node-externals');
module.exports = {
target: "node",
entry: "./server.js",
output: {
path: path.resolve(__dirname, "./"),
filename: "bundle-server.js",
},
module: {
rules: [
{
test: /\.jsx?$/,
loader: "babel-loader"
}
],
},
externals: [nodeExternals()],
devtool: 'inline-source-map',
};
What am I missing? Is it even possible to debug directly from VSCode? I'd like to be able to step over the original source files so I can have a quick debug-edit-rerun loop.
Seems related to this: Debug webpack bundled node ts with Visual Studio Code.

In your launch configs, you are providing output file of webpack as the program to debug.
To Build:
You can instead use program as path to your webpack runner. Ex:
"program": "${workspaceFolder}/node_modules/webpack/bin/webpack.js" // Or CLI
And then you should provide the file as an argument you want to run with webpack. Ex:
"args": [
"--config", "./some/dir/webpack.config.js"
]
To Run:
Follow the same procedure with a different program
"program": "${workspaceFolder}/node_modules/webpack-dev-server/bin/webpack-dev-server",
"args": [
"--config",
"webpack-server.config.js",
"--hot",
"--progress"
]

Try these two configurations. Should build the project first and then automagically attach the node inspector via VSCode. I've just tried it on my project and it seems to be working well.
I'm doing the same thing you are - building a project using Webpack and Babel
launch.json
{
"version": "0.2.0",
"configurations": [
{
"type": "node",
"request": "launch",
"name": "Debug Server",
"program": "${workspaceFolder}\\bundle-server.js",
"preLaunchTask": "build"
}
]
}
tasks.json
{
// See https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=733558
// for the documentation about the tasks.json format
"version": "2.0.0",
"tasks": [
{
"label": "build",
"type": "npm",
"script": "build",
"problemMatcher": [
]
}
]
}

Visual Studio Chutzpah Running test on different projects with AMD modules

I have two projects under a solution, one is my main web project, say MyProject and the other serves for testing purposes, say MyProject.Tests.
Solution
MyProject
MyProject.Tests
I want to have my JavaScript headless tests running to the second one.
On the first project, all the javascript files are under the Scripts directory, like so:
Scripts/
Common.js
Libs/
jquery/
jquery.js
requirejs/
require.js
At the test project, I have my chutzpah.json file on root.
MyProject.Tests
chutzpah.json
Tests/
Specs/
spec.js
The file has this configuration:
{
"Framework": "jasmine",
"TestHarnessReferenceMode": "AMD",
"TestHarnessLocationMode": "SettingsFileAdjacent",
"Tests": [ { "Path": "Tests/Specs" } ],
"AMDBasePath": "../MyProject/Scripts",
"CodeCoverageExcludes": ["*Common.js"],
"References": [
{ "Path": "../MyProject/Scripts/Libs/requirejs/require.js" },
{ "Path": "../MyProject/Scripts/Common.js" }
]
}
But when I try to run the spec file I get an error.
Spec file:
define(["jquery"], function ($) {
//code here. Doesn't matter, the error is because of the jquery module
});
The error, is this:
Error: Error opening C:/Users/g.dyrrahitis/Documents/Visual Studio 2013/Projects/MySolution/MyProject.Tests/Scripts/Libs/jquery/jquery.js: The system cannot find the path specified.
The thing is that chutzpah tries to find my jquery module at the test project rather the main project, where it resides.
Why I'm getting this kind of behavior and how can I solve this please? I've been trying for hours to tackle this with no luck so far.
Note
*The names MySolution, MyProject, MyProject.Tests are used for clarity, rather than using the real names.

I've found it, the chutzpah file hadn't the right configuration options (as expected) for the test harness directory.
I needed the TestHarnessDirectory and TestHarnessLocationMode options to explicitly instruct it to look at my main project directory.
This now is the correct one:
{
"TestHarnessDirectory": "../MyProject",
"TestHarnessLocationMode": "Custom",
"TestHarnessReferenceMode": "AMD",
"Framework": "jasmine",
"Tests": [ { "Path": "JavaScript/Specs" } ],
"AMDBasePath": "../MyProject/Scripts",
"CodeCoverageExcludes": [ "*Common.js" ],
"References": [
{ "Path": "../MyProject/Scripts/Libs/requirejs/require.js" },
{ "Path": "../MyProject/Scripts/Common.js" }
]
}
Just needed to tell chutzpah that the harness location mode is custom, in order to provide a directory for it, which is the root of my main project.
Beware for the right configuration paths then, you may end up struggling for hours like me to find a solution. And read the documentation thoroughly (which I hadn't done).