Replies: 1 comment 1 reply
-
if we could solve the incremental build problem, then strong +1 remove the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Should we remove
__webpack_require__.el
and alignmentblock_promise
with webpack?motivation:
__webpack_require__.el
is inconsistent with webpackalready caused more inconsistent, and we don't how many inconsistent it will cause in the future
lead bigger output, for example:
the
__webpack_require__.el
map of both a.js and b.js will be:which contain duplicate key
this is caused by
__webpack_require__.el
is actually generated at runtime module codegen, don't know which block actually belong to current runtime, so we can only iterate all blocks, and get its chunkGroup.runtime, if the chunkGroup.runtime is the superset of the current runtime, then we include it into the__webpack_require__.el
mapfor example, the chunkGroup of block
"./a.js@0:21"
and block"./b.js@0:21"
are pointed to same chunkGroup"shared"
, and its runtime is["a", "b"]
, so it is included into the__webpack_require__.el
map of a.js and b.jsthe reason of why we create
__webpack_require__.el
is for generate the correct output assets in incremental build, but actually, incremental build only affect the creation of module graph, the incorrect output assets is caused by the cache of codegen didn't invalidate correctlyBeta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions