Tailored Source And Test File Name Patterns Should Be Configurable

by ADMIN 67 views

Tailored Source and Test File Name Patterns Should be Configurable

Problem Description

In the existing core code of a project, there is a pattern where tailor for *_sources and *_tests targets rely on hard-coded constants. This is evident in the code snippet from the target_types.py file in the javascript backend of the project. For instance, the javascript_sources and javascript_tests targets are defined with hardcoded constants as shown below:

# https://github.com/pantsbuild/pants/blob/6c41074/src/python/pants/backend/javascript/target_types.py#L24-L25
javascript_sources = target_types.Source(
    extensions=[".js", ".jsx", ".ts", ".tsx"],
    pattern="**/*.js",
    pattern_type=PatternType.GLOB,
)

javascript_tests = target_types.Source(
    extensions=[".js"],
    pattern="**/*-tests.js",
    pattern_type=PatternType.GLOB,
)

This approach makes it difficult for repositories that use different naming conventions to tailor targets for these files without resorting to workarounds such as macros and/or alias mapping.

Solution Description

To improve the user experience, it would be beneficial to expose these file-based patterns as configurable options. This can be achieved by introducing subsystem options that allow users to customize the file name patterns for *_sources and *_tests targets. For example, users can specify the file extensions for JavaScript tests using the following command:

pants tailor --javascript-test-file-extensions='["*-tests.js", "*-test.js"]'

This approach provides a more flexible and user-friendly way to tailor targets for different file naming conventions.

Alternatives Considered

Before proposing this solution, we considered several alternatives:

  1. Using Macros: One possible approach is to use macros to define custom file name patterns. However, this approach can lead to complex and hard-to-maintain code.
  2. Alias Mapping: Another alternative is to use alias mapping to map custom file name patterns to the existing hardcoded constants. While this approach can provide some flexibility, it may not be as intuitive or user-friendly as a configurable option.
  3. Internal Tailor Rule Implementation: We also considered implementing custom tailor rules to handle specific file name patterns. However, this approach can lead to duplicated code and make it harder to maintain the project.
  4. Using __defaults__: Finally, we considered using the __defaults__ mechanism to provide default values for file name patterns. While this approach can provide some flexibility, it may not be as powerful or customizable as a configurable option.

Benefits of the Proposed Solution

The proposed solution offers several benefits:

  1. Improved User Experience: By exposing file-based patterns as configurable options, users can tailor targets for different file naming conventions without resorting to workarounds.
  2. Increased Flexibility: The proposed solution provides a more flexible way to handle file name patterns, making it easier to adapt to different project requirements.
  3. Easier Maintenance: By separating file name patterns from the core code, we can make it easier to maintain and update the project without affecting existing code.
  4. Better Customizability: The proposed solution allows users to customize file name patterns to suit their specific needs, making it a more user-friendly and adaptable solution.

Conclusion

In conclusion, exposing file-based patterns as configurable options is a more user-friendly and flexible approach to handling file name patterns in the project. By providing a more intuitive and customizable way to tailor targets for different file naming conventions, we can improve the user experience and make it easier to maintain and update the project.
Tailored Source and Test File Name Patterns Should be Configurable: Q&A

Q: What is the current issue with file name patterns in the project?

A: The current issue is that file name patterns for *_sources and *_tests targets are hardcoded in the core code. This makes it difficult for repositories that use different naming conventions to tailor targets for these files without resorting to workarounds such as macros and/or alias mapping.

Q: What are the benefits of exposing file-based patterns as configurable options?

A: Exposing file-based patterns as configurable options provides several benefits, including:

  • Improved user experience: Users can tailor targets for different file naming conventions without resorting to workarounds.
  • Increased flexibility: The proposed solution provides a more flexible way to handle file name patterns, making it easier to adapt to different project requirements.
  • Easier maintenance: By separating file name patterns from the core code, we can make it easier to maintain and update the project without affecting existing code.
  • Better customizability: The proposed solution allows users to customize file name patterns to suit their specific needs, making it a more user-friendly and adaptable solution.

Q: What alternatives were considered before proposing the solution?

A: Before proposing the solution, we considered several alternatives, including:

  • Using macros to define custom file name patterns
  • Using alias mapping to map custom file name patterns to the existing hardcoded constants
  • Implementing custom tailor rules to handle specific file name patterns
  • Using __defaults__ to provide default values for file name patterns

Q: Why were these alternatives not chosen?

A: These alternatives were not chosen because they either led to complex and hard-to-maintain code, or did not provide the level of flexibility and customizability that the proposed solution offers.

Q: How will the proposed solution be implemented?

A: The proposed solution will be implemented by introducing subsystem options that allow users to customize the file name patterns for *_sources and *_tests targets. This will be achieved through a combination of code changes and documentation updates.

Q: What are the next steps in implementing the proposed solution?

A: The next steps in implementing the proposed solution include:

  • Developing the subsystem options for customizing file name patterns
  • Updating the documentation to reflect the new options and their usage
  • Testing the proposed solution to ensure it works as expected
  • Deploying the solution to the project

Q: What are the expected outcomes of implementing the proposed solution?

A: The expected outcomes of implementing the proposed solution include:

  • Improved user experience through increased flexibility and customizability
  • Easier maintenance and updates to the project
  • Better adaptability to different project requirements
  • Increased user satisfaction and adoption of the project

Q: What are the potential risks and challenges associated with implementing the proposed solution?

A: The potential risks and challenges associated with implementing the proposed solution include:

  • Complexity in implementing the subsystem options
  • Potential conflicts with existing code or workflows
  • Difficulty in testing and validating the solution
  • Potential impact on user adoption and satisfaction

Q: How will the potential risks and challenges be mitigated?

A: The potential risks and challenges will be mitigated through:

  • Thorough testing and validation of the solution
  • Collaboration with users and stakeholders to ensure the solution meets their needs
  • Documentation and communication of the solution and its usage
  • Continuous monitoring and evaluation of the solution's impact and effectiveness.