webpack doesn't always report compilation errors with --watch #66

pbrant · 2016-08-18T22:11:50Z

Steps to reproduce:

Run webpack with --watch
Break a file in two places (error is reported)
Fix one of the problems (error isn't reported, only clue is that webpack didn't create the final bundle)
Fix the other error (bundle is created)

At this point, a new error will be reported (i.e. steps 2 through 4 can be repeated indefinitely).

I've done a bit of snooping around, but I'm not sure what the appropriate fix is. The after-compile plugin callback is called and cache.errors is populated, but just adding it to compilation.errors apparently isn't enough to tell webpack to display it.

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

ethul · 2016-08-19T03:00:16Z

Thanks for the report. I will take a look. What version of purescript, purs-loader, webpack, etc., are you using?

pbrant · 2016-08-19T03:24:18Z

Sorry, I should have included that before:

webpack 1.13.2
purescript 0.9.3
purs-loader 2.0.0-rc.1 ('next' in package.json)

along with a local clone of psa with the PureScript 0.9.x changes. I see the same behavior with plain psc though.

ethul · 2016-08-19T03:25:01Z

Great! Thanks for the info.

On Thursday, 18 August 2016, Peter Brant [email protected] wrote:

Sorry, I should have included that before:

webpack 1.13.2

purescript 0.9.3

purs-loader 2.0.0-rc.1 ('next' in package.json)

along with a local clone of psa with the PureScript 0.9.x changes. I see
the same behavior with plain psc though.

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#66 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAVYy4K7u-iGrZb1kcWEMH43AeQ5VI6Aks5qhSHigaJpZM4Jn9-c
.

ethul · 2016-11-20T02:39:54Z

Resolved inadvertently in b683b0b

Should be fixed in 2.1.1. Let me know if this is still an issue.

pbrant · 2016-11-24T00:00:26Z

I think this might still be a problem. Here is what I tried:

Starting with a fresh clone of purescript-webpack-example:

After installing, ran npm run webpack:watch, compilation finishes successfully
Edited src/example/Header.purs to add a second copy of the header function named header2
Changed DOM.text to DOM.textXX in both functions
Rewarded with ERROR in [1/2 UnknownName] src/Example/Header.purs:12:18 and [2/2 UnknownName] src/Example/Header.purs:18:18
Fixed one of the two functions, but nothing happened
Fixed the second one, bundle is created

ethul · 2016-11-24T00:10:47Z

Thanks for confirming and for the test case. I will give it a try.

…

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 19:00 Peter Brant ***@***.***> wrote: I think this might still be a problem. Here is what I tried: Starting with a fresh clone of purescript-webpack-example: - After installing, ran npm run webpack:watch, compilation finishes successfully - Edited src/example/Header.purs to add a second copy of the header function named header2 - Changed DOM.text to DOM.textXX in both functions - Rewarded with ERROR in [1/2 UnknownName] src/Example/Header.purs:12:18 and [2/2 UnknownName] src/Example/Header.purs:18:18 - Fixed one of the two functions, but nothing happened - Fixed the second one, bundle is created — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#66 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAVYy9DMmuqCM3NjM2gd4swMOWN1BGh5ks5rBNOagaJpZM4Jn9-c> .

Similar to the way psc-ide support works, the purs-loader now tolerates compiler errors when the `watch` option is true. When webpack is being run in watch mode the user can set `watch` to true in order to avoid failing the webpack bundle creation when the PureScript compiler fails. Resolves issue #66 Resolves issue #73 Resolves issue #74

ethul · 2017-02-20T01:07:47Z

I've published a beta release that should fix this issue. If you are willing to give it a try, that would be great! You can install the release under the beta dist tag.

npm install purs-loader@beta

In this release, there is a new option called watch. Please set this to true in your webpack config if you are running webpack in watch mode.

Thanks!

pbrant · 2017-02-20T16:52:49Z

Is there a particular version of webpack I should be using? For me with the beta version of purs-loader, webpack 1.14.0 and watch: true, it looks like errors aren't reported at all and the bundle isn't created after the initial run.

I've included the console output below with DEBUG=purs-loader (with a bit of additional logging added). This is a successful initial compilation, breaking Header.purs in two places (as above), and then fixing both.

Hash: 7c9b05e95ac6ed0c0772  
Version: webpack 1.14.0
Time: 4192ms
    Asset     Size  Chunks             Chunk Names
bundle.js  3.48 MB       0  [emitted]  main
   [1] ./src/Example.js 260 bytes {0} [built]
 [336] ./src/Example/Footer.js 46 bytes {0} [built]
    + 335 hidden modules

WARNING in            Src   Lib   All
Warnings   0     0     0  
Errors     0     0     0  

  purs-loader invalidating loader cache +846ms
  purs-loader invalidating loader cache +9s
 10% 0/1 build modules  purs-loader loader called Example.Header +427ms
  purs-loader spawning compiler psa [ '--output=output', 'bower_components/purescript-*/src/**/*.purs', 'src/**/*.purs' ] +0ms
  purs-loader compiling PureScript... +1ms
  purs-loader finished compiling PureScript (code = 1) +957ms
  purs-loader emitting error +0ms
  purs-loader watch is true, calling resolve(psModule) +0ms
  purs-loader loading PureScript source and FFI files from [ 'bower_components/purescript-*/src/**/*.purs', 'src/**/*.purs' ] +0ms
  purs-loader rebuilt module map +83ms
  purs-loader loading JavaScript for Example.Header +1ms
  purs-loader imports [ 'Prelude', 'React', 'React.DOM' ] +0ms
  purs-loader replaced imports [ 'Prelude', 'React', 'React.DOM' ] +0ms
  purs-loader additional imports for Example.Header: [] +1ms
  purs-loader invalidating loader cache +5s
 10% 0/1 build modules  purs-loader loader called Example.Header +428ms
  purs-loader spawning compiler psa [ '--output=output', 'bower_components/purescript-*/src/**/*.purs', 'src/**/*.purs' ] +0ms
  purs-loader compiling PureScript... +0ms
  purs-loader finished compiling PureScript (code = 0) +1s
  purs-loader loading PureScript source and FFI files from [ 'bower_components/purescript-*/src/**/*.purs', 'src/**/*.purs' ] +0ms
  purs-loader rebuilt module map +82ms
  purs-loader loading JavaScript for Example.Header +0ms
  purs-loader imports [ 'Prelude', 'React', 'React.DOM' ] +1ms
  purs-loader replaced imports [ 'Prelude', 'React', 'React.DOM' ] +0ms
  purs-loader additional imports for Example.Header: [] +0ms

ethul · 2017-02-20T18:05:55Z

My mistake. There was a typo which caused the bundle not to be generated. Please update to 2.4.0-beta.1 if you have a chance and give it a go.

Thanks!

pbrant · 2017-02-20T18:57:33Z

No joy, I'm afraid. For what it's worth, purescript-webpack-example uses bundle: false so the fix there might not have helped.

…

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 7:05 PM, eric ***@***.***> wrote: My mistake. There was a typo which caused the bundle not to be generated. Please update to 2.4.0-beta.1 if you have a chance and give it a go. Thanks! — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#66 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABeaI5LYWAh63qO1XfFRP_Od6ojwRCMks5redYDgaJpZM4Jn9-c> .

ethul · 2017-02-20T19:13:05Z

Thanks for giving this another try. I am testing using webpack 1.13, but 1.14 I suspect should also work. In the output above, it looks like webpack is does produce a bundle:

bundle.js  3.48 MB       0  [emitted]  main

Which npm script are you using? npm run webpack:server:debug?

Also, just to make sure that I follow the test-case. Is it that when you break the Header.purs, webpack is not recompiling at all or is webpack rebuilding but no purescript error is reported?

Thanks!

ethul · 2017-02-20T19:15:50Z

Quick update: I was just able to reproduce your issue. It seems that with just webpack watch we get this issue, but with the webpack dev server, things seem to work as expected. Let me take a look.

pbrant · 2017-02-20T19:41:51Z

Thanks much. I was indeed using `DEBUG=purs-loader npm run webpack:watch`.

…

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 8:15 PM, eric ***@***.***> wrote: Quick update: I was just able to reproduce your issue. It seems that with just webpack watch we get this issue, but with the webpack dev server, things seem to work as expected. Let me take a look. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#66 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABeaDTpn2E5N7yDFrnobDGMsDIRMSjhks5reeZmgaJpZM4Jn9-c> .

ethul · 2017-02-20T19:43:06Z

Welcome. Thanks for testing this out. I will have to investigate this further. It seems the compilation error is being reported to webpack, but is not displayed. If I add the following plugin to the webpack.config.js, then the error is displayed:

  plugins: [
    function() {
      this.plugin('done', function(stats){
        if (stats.compilation.errors && stats.compilation.errors.length) {
          stats.compilation.errors.forEach(function(error){
            process.stderr.write(error);
          });
        }
      });
    }
  ]

ethul · 2017-02-20T19:58:19Z

Simplified this a little bit:

  plugins: [
    function(){
      this.plugin('done', function(stats){
        process.stderr.write(stats.toString('errors-only'));
      });
    }
  ]

If you add the above to report the compilation error, does the beta version fix this issue for you?

As a note, the bundle will not be modified if you are fixing type-related errors. It is produced if text changes, for example.

ethul · 2017-02-20T20:00:00Z

If adding the plugin to report the error does work for you, I may track this as a limitation and consider this issue resolved.

pbrant · 2017-02-20T20:07:00Z

Sounds good to me. I can confirm that adding the snippet above to webpack.config.js fixes the problem. Thanks very much for slogging through this (and enabling me to continue in my blissful ignorance of webpack internals!).

…

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 9:00 PM, eric ***@***.***> wrote: If adding the plugin to report the error does work for you, I may track this as a limitation and consider this issue resolved. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#66 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABeaGdyUq9fjSt9Yj5ty8nPvbesph1Gks5refDBgaJpZM4Jn9-c> .

ethul · 2017-02-20T22:58:55Z

Thanks for confirming! I've added a note about this plugin in the readme. Thanks again for your help.

ethul · 2017-02-25T15:36:50Z

https://github.com/ethul/purs-loader/releases/tag/2.4.0

ethul added the type: bug label Oct 12, 2016

ethul self-assigned this Oct 12, 2016

ethul closed this as completed Nov 20, 2016

ethul reopened this Nov 24, 2016

ethul closed this as completed Feb 25, 2017

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

webpack doesn't always report compilation errors with --watch #66

webpack doesn't always report compilation errors with --watch #66

pbrant commented Aug 18, 2016 •

edited

Loading

ethul commented Aug 19, 2016

pbrant commented Aug 19, 2016

ethul commented Aug 19, 2016

ethul commented Nov 20, 2016

pbrant commented Nov 24, 2016

ethul commented Nov 24, 2016 via email

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

pbrant commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

pbrant commented Feb 20, 2017 via email

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

pbrant commented Feb 20, 2017 via email

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

pbrant commented Feb 20, 2017 via email

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 25, 2017

webpack doesn't always report compilation errors with --watch #66

webpack doesn't always report compilation errors with --watch #66

Comments

pbrant commented Aug 18, 2016 • edited Loading

ethul commented Aug 19, 2016

pbrant commented Aug 19, 2016

ethul commented Aug 19, 2016

ethul commented Nov 20, 2016

pbrant commented Nov 24, 2016

ethul commented Nov 24, 2016 via email

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

pbrant commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

pbrant commented Feb 20, 2017 via email

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

pbrant commented Feb 20, 2017 via email

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

pbrant commented Feb 20, 2017 via email

ethul commented Feb 20, 2017

ethul commented Feb 25, 2017

pbrant commented Aug 18, 2016 •

edited

Loading