<!--
Thanks for submitting a pull request!
We appreciate you spending the time to work on these changes. Please
provide enough information so that others can review your pull request.
The three fields below are mandatory.
Before submitting a pull request, please make sure the following is
done:
1. Fork [the repository](https://github.com/facebook/react) and create
your branch from `main`.
2. Run `yarn` in the repository root.
3. If you've fixed a bug or added code that should be tested, add tests!
4. Ensure the test suite passes (`yarn test`). Tip: `yarn test --watch
TestName` is helpful in development.
5. Run `yarn test --prod` to test in the production environment. It
supports the same options as `yarn test`.
6. If you need a debugger, run `yarn test --debug --watch TestName`,
open `chrome://inspect`, and press "Inspect".
7. Format your code with
[prettier](https://github.com/prettier/prettier) (`yarn prettier`).
8. Make sure your code lints (`yarn lint`). Tip: `yarn linc` to only
check changed files.
9. Run the [Flow](https://flowtype.org/) type checks (`yarn flow`).
10. If you haven't already, complete the CLA.
Learn more about contributing:
https://reactjs.org/docs/how-to-contribute.html
-->
## Summary
`Cannot access .then on server` is not an ideal message when you try to
await or do promise chain to the properties of client reference. The
below example will let `.then` get accessed by native code while
handling the promise chain but the access is not clearly visible in user
code.
```
import('./client-module').then((mod) => mod.Component)
```
This PR chnage the error message of module reference proxy '.then'
property to show more kinds of usage, then it can be pretty clearly for
helping users to avoid the bad usage
<!--
Explain the **motivation** for making this change. What existing problem
does the pull request solve?
-->
## How did you test this change?
Unit test
<!--
Demonstrate the code is solid. Example: The exact commands you ran and
their output, screenshots / videos if the pull request changes the user
interface.
How exactly did you verify that your PR solves the issue you wanted to
solve?
If you leave this empty, your PR will very likely be closed.
-->
This won't ever be serialized and is likely just a mistake.
This should be covered by the "use server" compiler since it ensures
that something that accepts a "this" won't be allowed to compile and if
it doesn't accept it, TypeScript should ideally forbid it to be passed.
So maybe this is unnecessary.
It's possible for the same function instance to appear more than once in
the same graph or even the same file.
Currently this errors on trying to reconfigure the property but it
really doesn't matter which one wins. First or last.
Regardless there will be an entry point generated that can get them.
Alternative to #28354.
If a client reference is one of the props being describes as part of
another error, we call toString on it, which errors.
We should error explicitly when a Symbol prop is extracted.
However, pragmatically I added the toString symbol tag even though we
don't know what the real tostring will be but we also lie about the
typeof.
We can however in addition to this give it a different description
because describing this property as an object isn't quite right.
We probably could extract the export name but that's kind of renderer
specific and I just added this shared module to Fizz which doesn't have
that which is unfortunate an consequence.
For default exports we don't have a good name of what the alias was in
the receiver. Could maybe call it "default" but for now I just call it
"client".
The `reference` that is passed into `registerServerReference` can be a
plain function. It does not need to have the three additonal properties
of a `ServerRefeference`. In fact, adding these properties (plus `bind`)
is precisely what `registerServerReference` does.
Client reference proxy should implement getOwnPropertyDescriptor. One
practical place where this shows up is when consuming CJS module.exports
in ESM modules. Node creates named exports it statically infers from the
underlying source but it only sets the named export if the CJS exports
hasOwnProperty. This trap will allow the proxy to respond affirmatively.
I did not add unit tests because contriving the ESM <-> CJS scenario in
Jest is challenging. I did add new components to the flight fixture
which demonstrate that the named exports are properly constructed with
the client reference whereas they were not before.
We already did this for Server References on the Client so this brings
us parity with that. This gives us some more flexibility with changing
the runtime implementation without having to affect the loaders.
We can also do more in the runtime such as adding `.bind()` support to
Server References.
I also moved the CommonJS Proxy creation into the runtime helper from
the register so that it can be handled in one place.
This lets us remove the forks from Next.js since the loaders can be
simplified there to just use these helpers.
This PR doesn't change the protocol or shape of the objects. They're
still specific to each bundler but ideally we should probably move this
to shared helpers that can be used by multiple bundler implementations.
