feat(process-assert-to-assert): introduce #200

matheusmorett2 · 2025-09-06T16:12:54Z

Closes #197

Add codemod recipe `process-assert-to-assert` to handle deprecation DEP0100.

Before

const { assert: nodeAssert, env } = require("process");
nodeAssert(condition, "Assertion valid");

After

const assert = require("node:assert");
const { env } = require("process");
assert(condition, "Assertion valid");

Fix: `remove-binding.ts`

handle scenario where have alias in require

AugustinMauroy

I didn't see any test for that kind cases

import process from "node:process"

But good first pr

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

brunocroh

Awesome first contribution 🎉, Thank you @matheusmorett2 !

Just small fixes needed

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/package.json

brunocroh · 2025-09-06T17:48:44Z

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

+ * Before:
+ * ```js
+ * process.assert(value);
+ * process.assert.strictEqual(a, b);
+ * ```
+ * 
+ * After:
+ * ```js
+ * import assert from "node:assert";
+ * assert(value);
+ * assert.strictEqual(a, b);
+ * ```


Remove process.assert.strictEqual reference, I think it was added by mistake. This scenario does not exist. Add bold formatting to the before/after text.

Suggested change

* Before:

* ```js

* process.assert(value);

* process.assert.strictEqual(a, b);

* ```

*

* After:

* ```js

* import assert from "node:assert";

* assert(value);

* assert.strictEqual(a, b);

* ```

* **Before**:

* ```js

* process.assert(value);

* ```

*

* **After**:

* ```js

* import assert from "node:assert";

* assert(value);

* ```

actually my code wasn't working for assert.strictEqual but is should

https://nodejs.org/api/assert.html

so I kept the assert.strictEqual

Also added the bold on before and after words

My point is that the TypeScript docs say that the code in the before block, process.assert.strictEqual(a, b), will be updated to use assert.strictEqual.

However, process.assert.strictEqual does not exist, at least I couldn’t find any reference to it.

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

brunocroh

Please fix the conflict in the remove-binding file

AugustinMauroy

For require call not in cjs context the transformed code may be wrong.

For example this before

import { createRequire} from 'node:module';
const require = createRequire(import.meta.dirname)

process.assert(true);

Broken after with the current implementation

const assert = require('node:assert');
import { createRequire} from 'node:module';
const require = createRequire(import.meta.dirname)

assert(true);

In this case I expect that require is undefined.

Solutions:

Try to found a logic that handle that.
Add it at inline comment so we know for the future

AugustinMauroy · 2025-09-09T20:49:41Z

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

+
+		for (const processImport of allImports) {
+			const binding = resolveBindingPath(processImport, "$.assert");
+			replaceRules.push({


Suggested change

replaceRules.push({

replaceRules.push({

AugustinMauroy · 2025-09-09T20:52:24Z

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

+
+	const processImportsToRemove = new Set<SgNode>();
+
+	function processImports(moduleName: "process" | "node:process") {


Suggested change

function processImports(moduleName: "process" | "node:process") {

function processImports(moduleName: string) {

Utilities used inside this function have regex to catch both usage of node:process or process. So you can simplify the logic of this function.

AugustinMauroy · 2025-09-09T20:54:37Z

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

+			if (binding) {
+				replaceRules.push({
+					importNode: processImport,
+					binding,
+					rule: {
+						kind: "member_expression",
+						has: {
+							kind: "identifier",
+							regex: `^${binding}$`,
+							field: "object"
+						}
+					},
+					replaceWith: "assert"
+				});
+			}
+
+			const processUsages = rootNode.findAll({
+				rule: {
+					kind: 'member_expression',
+					has: {
+						kind: 'identifier',
+						regex: '^process$'
+					}
+				}
+			});


@brunocroh correct me if I am wrong but here dinging also include process so code after the condition is useless ?

AugustinMauroy · 2025-09-09T20:57:34Z

utils/src/ast-grep/remove-binding.ts

+				{
+					kind: "pair_pattern",
+				},
+				{
+					kind: "shorthand_property_identifier_pattern",
+				},


Suggested change

{

kind: "pair_pattern",

},

{

kind: "shorthand_property_identifier_pattern",

},

{

kind: "pair_pattern" },

{ kind: "shorthand_property_identifier_pattern" },

I found that simplest to read idk what you think about that

AugustinMauroy · 2025-09-09T20:59:11Z

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/README.md

+
+This recipe transforms the usage of `process.assert` to use `assert` module.
+
+See [DEP0100](https://github.com/nodejs/userland-migrations/issues/197).


Suggested change

See [DEP0100](https://github.com/nodejs/userland-migrations/issues/197).

See [DEP0100](https://nodejs.org/api/deprecations.html#DEP100).

Ps: verify the link I am on mobile for this review

AugustinMauroy · 2025-10-09T21:18:14Z

hey @matheusmorett2 any news on this pr ?

avivkeller

I think this could use some refactoring. There's a lot of nesting, among other things.

Can you break it up, and look at the other mods for inspiration?

avivkeller · 2025-10-10T17:31:15Z

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

+	const replaceRules: Array<{
+		importNode?: SgNode;
+		binding?: string;
+		rule: Rule;
+		replaceWith?: string;
+	}> = [{


Can we define this type outside as ReplaceRule?

avivkeller · 2025-10-10T17:32:57Z

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

+	}
+
+	return sourceCode;
+}


Suggested change

}

}

avivkeller · 2025-10-10T17:33:14Z

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

+		const isCommonJs = root.filename().includes('.cjs');
+
+		if (Boolean(usingRequire) || isCommonJs) {
+			return `const assert = require("node:assert");${EOL}${sourceCode}`;


What if the assert variable is already defined?

avivkeller · 2025-10-10T17:33:29Z

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts

+			}
+		});
+
+		const isCommonJs = root.filename().includes('.cjs');


What if the filename is .cjs.mjs?

AugustinMauroy · 2025-10-19T20:04:39Z

bump @matheusmorett2

matheusmorett2 added 3 commits September 6, 2025 13:05

fix(util/remove-binding): handle scenario where have alias in require

a96083c

feat(process-assert-to-assert): introduce

48c4a1d

fix: remove test only

91b0098

AugustinMauroy reviewed Sep 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

recipes/process-assert-to-assert/src/workflow.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

AugustinMauroy requested a review from brunocroh September 6, 2025 16:21

brunocroh reviewed Sep 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

fix: apply comments suggestions

ccec01a

matheusmorett2 requested review from AugustinMauroy and brunocroh September 6, 2025 20:16

brunocroh reviewed Sep 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

AugustinMauroy reviewed Sep 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

JakobJingleheimer added the awaiting author Reviewer has requested something from the author label Sep 23, 2025

avivkeller reviewed Oct 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

JakobJingleheimer added the dep:v23 Migration handles deprecation introduced in node v23 label Oct 16, 2025

AugustinMauroy mentioned this pull request Oct 19, 2025

spec(v22-to-v24): what we have to do #239

Open

19 tasks


		const processImportsToRemove = new Set<SgNode>();

		function processImports(moduleName: "process" \| "node:process") {

	function processImports(moduleName: "process" \| "node:process") {
	function processImports(moduleName: string) {


		This recipe transforms the usage of `process.assert` to use `assert` module.

		See [DEP0100](https://github.com/nodejs/userland-migrations/issues/197).

	See [DEP0100](https://github.com/nodejs/userland-migrations/issues/197).
	See [DEP0100](https://nodejs.org/api/deprecations.html#DEP100).

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

feat(process-assert-to-assert): introduce #200

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat(process-assert-to-assert): introduce #200

Uh oh!

Conversation

matheusmorett2 commented Sep 6, 2025

Add codemod recipe process-assert-to-assert to handle deprecation DEP0100.

Fix: remove-binding.ts

Uh oh!

AugustinMauroy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

brunocroh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

brunocroh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AugustinMauroy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AugustinMauroy commented Oct 9, 2025

Uh oh!

avivkeller left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AugustinMauroy commented Oct 19, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Add codemod recipe `process-assert-to-assert` to handle deprecation DEP0100.

Fix: `remove-binding.ts`