this[type] is not a function #333

ghost · 2017-02-04T21:30:52Z

I'm need to modify js file. So I parse my JSX with esprima, make some changes and then I'm trying to code AST into js. But I have this error this[type] is not a function

Code

import React from 'react';
import { Route, IndexRoute } from 'react-router';
import { Map } from 'immutable';

import App from './containers/App';

export const pages = new Map({
    index: '/'

});

/*eslint-disable react/jsx-max-props-per-line*/
/*eslint-disable react/jsx-sort-props*/
/*eslint-disable max-len*/
export default (
    <Route path = { pages.get('index') } component = { App }>
        <IndexRoute component = { App } />
    </Route>
    
);

Parsing file:

        const file = fs.readFileSync(routes, 'utf8');
        const parsedFile = esprima.parse(file, {
            sourceType: 'module',
            jsx: true,
            comment: true
        });
        let token = false;
        for (let i = 0; i < parsedFile.body.length; i++) {
            if (parsedFile.body[i].type === 'ExportNamedDeclaration') {
                const declarations = parsedFile.body[i].declaration.declarations;

                for (let j = 0; j < declarations.length; j++) {
                    if (declarations[j].id.name === 'pages') {
                        const properties = declarations[j].init.arguments[0].properties;
                        properties.push({
                            type: 'Property',
                            key: {type: 'Identifier', name: 'test'},
                            computed: false,
                            value: {type: 'Literal', value: '/test'},
                            kind: 'init',
                            method: false,
                            shorthand: false
                        });
                    }
                }
            }
            token = true;
        }

Escoding:

        const code = escodegen.generate(parsedFile, {
            format: {
                indent: {
                    style: '    ',
                    base: 0,
                    adjustMultilineComment: true
                },
                newline: '\n',
                space: ' ',
                json: false,
                renumber: false,
                hexadecimal: false,
                quotes: 'single',
                escapeless: false,
                compact: false,
                parentheses: true,
                semicolons: true,
                safeConcatenation: false
            },
            moz: {
                starlessGenerator: false,
                parenthesizedComprehensionBlock: false,
                comprehensionExpressionStartsWithAssignment: false
            },
            parse: null,
            comment: true,
            sourceMap: undefined,
            sourceMapRoot: null,
            sourceMapWithCode: false,
            file: undefined,
            directive: false,
            verbatim: undefined
        });

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

papandreou · 2017-03-25T11:16:17Z

escodegen doesn't currently support serializing the JSX-related AST nodes. There's an old fork, but that only works with esprima-fb, which is no longer maintained.

It seems like it would be possible to move escodegen-jsx forward, adapt to the AST format differences, and turn it into a PR against escodegen.

@Constellation, @michaelficarra, would that be a welcome contribution?

michaelficarra · 2017-03-25T15:40:51Z

@papandreou Where are the JSX AST nodes specified? How stable are they? What do people use today to codegen JSX code? Are there any estree-based parsers that also support JSX?

papandreou · 2017-03-25T18:19:34Z

Where are the JSX AST nodes specified?

It looks like this is as authoritative as it gets: https://github.com/facebook/jsx/blob/master/AST.md

How stable are they?

Historically, quite stable. Latest addition was JSXSpreadChild in June 2016. I have to admit that I'm not well informed about whether more stuff is coming up, though.

What do people use today to codegen JSX code?

There's babel-generator.

From a quick glance eslint --fix sidesteps the need by only doing text-based replacements in the rules that apply to JSX.

Prettier comes with its own code generator that supports the JSX extensions.

Are there any estree-based parsers that also support JSX?

esprima 3.0.0+
acorn-jsx
I don't know if babylon counts, as they're deviating from estree a bit.

nadavye · 2017-12-09T23:54:19Z

Any update on this issue?
Do you plan to resolve it soon?

KathiresanRamkumar95 · 2018-08-28T10:14:34Z

Any update on this ?

Thanks !

papandreou · 2018-08-28T10:54:10Z

@michaelficarra, any thoughts on what I wrote in #333 (comment) wrt. whether JSX support would be a welcome addition?

erquhart · 2019-04-05T15:21:45Z

@michaelficarra bump ^^ inquiring minds want to know :)

michaelficarra · 2019-04-05T16:13:04Z

@papandreou @erquhart Since JSX seems to be a thing that people are continuing to do, I'm okay with having escodegen support it up to the point that it doesn't sacrifice the original goal of escodegen being able to correctly, unambiguously, and minimally generate source text for any estree format AST. I'm not volunteering to do the work to add that support, but I'll review/merge PRs to the best of my ability.

erquhart · 2019-04-05T16:46:01Z

Glad to hear you're open to it! Reviewing and merging is plenty of work on it's own, thanks for being up to it.

It looks like the general test suite is against an in-repo copy of esprima 1.0.0, but JSX support requires at least 3.0. If we prefer not to test against the esprima npm dependency, we could paste in 3.0 or 4.0 and add a dedicated suite for JSX mirroring the approach in test/test.js. Sound right?

michaelficarra · 2019-04-05T16:54:05Z

I'm not sure why we wouldn't just use an npm dev dependency.

erquhart · 2019-04-05T17:02:54Z

I'm not either, but your current test suites don't. Just looking to match whatever you as maintainers prefer. I assumed you were pinned to that test copy of 1.0.0 as a common denominator (and non-moving target). Should we just use npm instead of that copy, and add the JSX tests to the general suite, or leave the general suite as is and use the npm copy for a separate JSX suite?

erquhart · 2019-04-05T18:59:59Z

The only issue I'm seeing that's complicating things a bit is how esprima returns Literal nodes with their value and raw values wrapped in literal single quotes (inside of double quotes):

+ expected - actual

   "value": {
       "type": "Literal",
-      "value": "'string'",
-      "raw": "\"'string'\""
+      "value": "string",
+      "raw": "\"string\""

This is also one of two test failures that surfaces when using the npm copy of esprima in the general test.js suite. (The other failure is esprima no longer returning a leading 0 for less-than-one numeric literals, ".14" instead of "0.14".)

For now I'm going to just return the value from literals within JSX so tests can pass, but we'll need to consider how to address this before merge time. I could be missing something obvious too, maybe an option needs to be set for compatibility with newer esprima?

erquhart · 2019-04-05T22:14:06Z

PR is up with full support, outstanding points of discussion noted in the OP.

@papandreou you're pretty great with syntax related things, if you're still interested in this and have time to give this a pass to see if I missed anything, please do! You can open a PR against my branch to address gaps as well.

AwesomeDevin · 2019-08-29T14:42:31Z

How can i resolve it , please ！！！

papandreou · 2019-08-29T14:49:34Z

@AwesomeDevin, you can take @erquhart's PR for a spin and help him QA and finish it :)

erquhart · 2019-09-04T20:54:21Z

Yeah it's definitely not dead, I just got temporarily pulled away from the work that needed it. The PR does need some improvements, I noticed deficiencies compared to a prior JSX PR that was more robust, but that didn't make it through for some reason - and now I cannot find it for the life of me. Perhaps it was against another ES stringification lib.

sag1v · 2022-07-03T07:11:53Z

@papandreou @erquhart Are you still considering supporting JSX?

papandreou · 2022-07-07T10:59:49Z

I'm not actively working on it.

sag1v · 2022-07-07T16:08:55Z

I'm not actively working on it.

Oh sorry to hear that 😞 so is it safe to say that this project is not maintained anymore? If so, i think it would be nice if it was mentioned in the readme.
Nevertheless, thanks for this great project 🙏

papandreou · 2022-07-07T16:18:00Z

I'm not a maintainer of this project, and I was only talking about the JSX support, which @erquhart initiated work on. I think you're jumping to conclusions :)

sag1v · 2022-07-09T13:08:25Z

@papandreou Yeah sorry! I tagged the wrong person 😄 I meant to tag @michaelficarra

smol-honk · 2022-10-27T17:11:29Z

Would we be able to sync this bad boy in here? https://github.com/wallabyjs/escodegen

papandreou mentioned this issue Mar 25, 2017

ES6 support assetgraph/assetgraph#712

Merged

brentlintner mentioned this issue Jun 7, 2017

Enable JSX support via setting Esprima's and TypeScript's JSX flag brentlintner/synt#83

Open

dy mentioned this issue May 25, 2018

Refactor hughsk/ast-transform#1

Open

erquhart linked a pull request Apr 5, 2019 that will close this issue

feat: add jsx support #391

Draft

3 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

this[type] is not a function #333

this[type] is not a function #333

ghost commented Feb 4, 2017

papandreou commented Mar 25, 2017

michaelficarra commented Mar 25, 2017

papandreou commented Mar 25, 2017

nadavye commented Dec 9, 2017

KathiresanRamkumar95 commented Aug 28, 2018

papandreou commented Aug 28, 2018

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

michaelficarra commented Apr 5, 2019

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

michaelficarra commented Apr 5, 2019

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

AwesomeDevin commented Aug 29, 2019 •

edited

Loading

papandreou commented Aug 29, 2019

erquhart commented Sep 4, 2019 •

edited

Loading

sag1v commented Jul 3, 2022

papandreou commented Jul 7, 2022

sag1v commented Jul 7, 2022

papandreou commented Jul 7, 2022

sag1v commented Jul 9, 2022

smol-honk commented Oct 27, 2022

this[type] is not a function #333

this[type] is not a function #333

Comments

ghost commented Feb 4, 2017

papandreou commented Mar 25, 2017

michaelficarra commented Mar 25, 2017

papandreou commented Mar 25, 2017

nadavye commented Dec 9, 2017

KathiresanRamkumar95 commented Aug 28, 2018

papandreou commented Aug 28, 2018

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

michaelficarra commented Apr 5, 2019

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

michaelficarra commented Apr 5, 2019

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

erquhart commented Apr 5, 2019

AwesomeDevin commented Aug 29, 2019 • edited Loading

papandreou commented Aug 29, 2019

erquhart commented Sep 4, 2019 • edited Loading

sag1v commented Jul 3, 2022

papandreou commented Jul 7, 2022

sag1v commented Jul 7, 2022

papandreou commented Jul 7, 2022

sag1v commented Jul 9, 2022

smol-honk commented Oct 27, 2022

AwesomeDevin commented Aug 29, 2019 •

edited

Loading

erquhart commented Sep 4, 2019 •

edited

Loading