fix: use full local ident (not mangled) for hashing #20199
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 1116757 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
Contributor
|
This PR is packaged and the instant preview is available (50689e1). Install it locally:
npm i -D webpack@https://pkg.pr.new/webpack@50689e1
yarn add -D webpack@https://pkg.pr.new/webpack@50689e1
pnpm add -D webpack@https://pkg.pr.new/webpack@50689e1 |
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #20199 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
|
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Summary
Always use full classname (or export) to generate fullhash of
[local]placholder.Why?
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
bugfix
Did you add tests for your changes?
Existing
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No
If relevant, what needs to be documented once your changes are merged or what have you already documented?
Nothing