Highlighting error not using parentheses inside an if condition

[Mariede]

Hi there, I am sorry to say that but maybe we got a little bug within this release:

• When not using the parenthesis inside this if condition:
  

• When using it, things go fine:
  

Thank's for helping.

[Thom1729]

Can you paste an example as text?

[Mariede]

Can you paste an example as text?

sure, I will paste the head of the function together with the scoped validation function where code starts to break the highlight.

Starts here:

(checkVazaoFimEscala < checkVazaoMaximo || (checkVazaoMaximo < checkVazaoNormal) || (checkVazaoNormal < checkVazaoMinimo))

Strange but this same code does not break the highlight inside a functional react component.

const calculate1 = async (req, res) => {
	// Parametros de sessao


		...


	// Validacoes nos valores recebidos
	const _validateData = ( ... some params ... ) => {
		const limitsValues = enumData.validateLimitsValues;
		const errorStack = [];
		const decimalsAfter = 6;


		...


		_limitsCheck(
			errorStack,
			_valorTemperaturaAfterCooler,
			limitsValues.temperatura[0],
			limitsValues.temperatura[1],
			`Umidade relativa: temperatura (aftercooler ou outro) deve estar entre ${functions.formatNumberToString(limitsValues.temperatura[0])} ${temperaturaUnidadePadrao} e ${functions.formatNumberToString(limitsValues.temperatura[1])} ${temperaturaUnidadePadrao} (${functions.formatNumberToString(_valorTemperaturaAfterCooler)} ${temperaturaUnidadePadrao})`
		);

		// Valor viscosidade dinamica
		_limitsCheck(
			errorStack,
			_valorViscosidadeDinamica,
			limitsValues.viscosidadeDinamica[0],
			limitsValues.viscosidadeDinamica[1],
			`Viscosidade dinâmica: valor deve estar entre ${functions.formatNumberToString(limitsValues.viscosidadeDinamica[0])} e ${functions.formatNumberToString(limitsValues.viscosidadeDinamica[1])} (${functions.formatNumberToString(_valorViscosidadeDinamica)})`
		);
		// -------------------------------

		// Checagem vazao (minimo e maximo)
		if (_valorVazaoMinimo !== '' || _valorVazaoNormal !== '' || _valorVazaoMaximo !== '' || _valorVazaoFimEscala !== '') {
			const checkVazaoMinimo = (_valorVazaoMinimo === '' || _valorVazaoMinimo === 0 ? (_valorVazaoNormal || 0) : _valorVazaoMinimo);
			const checkVazaoNormal = (_valorVazaoNormal === '' ? 0 : _valorVazaoNormal); // Vazao normal sempre presente
			const checkVazaoMaximo = (_valorVazaoMaximo === '' || _valorVazaoMaximo === 0 ? (_valorVazaoFimEscala || _valorVazaoNormal || 0) : _valorVazaoMaximo);
			const checkVazaoFimEscala = (_valorVazaoFimEscala === '' ? (_valorVazaoMaximo || _valorVazaoNormal || 0) : _valorVazaoFimEscala);

			if (checkVazaoFimEscala < checkVazaoMaximo || (checkVazaoMaximo < checkVazaoNormal) || (checkVazaoNormal < checkVazaoMinimo)) {
				errorStack.push('Vazão: valor de fim de escala deve ser maior ou igual ao valor máximo, que deve ser maior ou igual ao valor normal, que deve ser maior ou igual ao valor mínimo (caso exista)');
			}
		}
		// -------------------------------

		// Checagem pressao diferencial (minimo e maximo)
		if (_valorPressaoDiferencialNormal !== '' || _valorPressaoDiferencialFimEscala !== '') {
			const checkPressaoDiferencialNormal = (_valorPressaoDiferencialNormal === '' ? (_valorPressaoDiferencialFimEscala || 0) : _valorPressaoDiferencialNormal);
			const checkPressaoDiferencialFimEscala = (_valorPressaoDiferencialFimEscala === '' ? (_valorPressaoDiferencialNormal || 0) : _valorPressaoDiferencialFimEscala);

			if (checkPressaoDiferencialFimEscala < checkPressaoDiferencialNormal) {
				errorStack.push('Pressão diferencial: valor de fim de escala deve ser maior ou igual ao valor normal (caso exista)');
			}
		}
		// -------------------------------




		...

[Thom1729]

Looks like the problem is that the < in checkVazaoFimEscala < is being parsed as the beginning of function type arguments. This is almost certainly a bug in the Flow extension. It looks like it's pretty hard to trigger — you need something like foo < bar < baz, or foo < bar | baz < xyzzy.

I'll take a look. There may be a similar bug in the core TypeScript definition as well.

[Mariede]

wow looks bigger than i thought... if you need help with some other test let me know ok. Thanks

[Thom1729]

In this particular case, which uses the || operator, I could hack around it (such a hack is already in place for TypeScript), but the bug would still appear in foo < bar | baz < xyzzy. I'm currently opening a core issue for a change that would help, but that's not a short-term solution (or a guaranteed solution at all).

I might come up with a clean solution, and if that fails I'll probably implement a dirty one, but I'd use parens there in the meantime.

[Thom1729]

Should be fixed in v11.1.1. It's the hacky fix, not a clean one, but it should do the right thing in most cases and it shouldn't make anything worse.

[Mariede]

Although it is not a clean solution, it is a welcome help! Thank's