Escapable commas in CLI options?

Comienza con las definiciones de --ignore y el flujo de análisis en packages/react-docgen-cli/src/commands/parse/command.ts; después, compáralos con los typings del analizador de argumentos de Commander en las líneas enlazadas de typings/index.d.ts. Determina cómo se deben habilitar las comas escapadas sin cambiar la división actual por comas y verifica que --ignore acepte valores que contengan comas, mientras que los valores ordinarios conserven su comportamiento actual.

The commander argument parser for the --ignore option:
https://github.com/reactjs/react-docgen/blob/f5d644a3041c227c4889059e787fcbaab57ec70e/packages/react-docgen-cli/src/commands/parse/command.ts#L26-L39
https://github.com/reactjs/react-docgen/blob/f5d644a3041c227c4889059e787fcbaab57ec70e/packages/react-docgen-cli/src/commands/parse/command.ts#L62-L67

... splits on a comma, which makes it impossible to use glob brace expansion for this option or commas in general for any option that also uses this argument parser.

Would supporting escapable commas be possible?

To avoid breaking changes you may need to make it opt-in (behind a new option --comma-escaping or similar.)

The problem seems common enough and has been solved different ways in different languages. Here is a rough first pass after a little (very little) research:

/**
 * Split on commas (","), unless they are escaped with a backslash("\,").
 *
 * Escaped commas are replaced with individual commas.
 */
export function splitOnComma(str: string): string[] {
  if (typeof str !== 'string') {
    const errorMessage = 'input must be a string'
    throw new TypeError(errorMessage)
  }
  const DELIMETER = ','
  const ESCAPE_CHAR = '\\'
  const ESCAPED_DELIMETER = ESCAPE_CHAR + DELIMETER
  const hasEscapedDelimeter = str.includes(ESCAPED_DELIMETER)

  // Negative Lookbehind: https://www.regular-expressions.info/lookaround.html
  const result = str.split(/,(?<!\\,)/)

  if (hasEscapedDelimeter) {
    return result.map((subStr) => subStr.replace(/\\,/gi, DELIMETER))
  }
  return result
}

I don't have experience with negative lookbehinds. I wrote the example to favor being excessively self-documenting. Refinements could include:

• improved error message
• reducing the number of lines needed
• adding unit tests
• if the build tools are configured for ES2021+, String.prototype.replaceAll could be used instead.
  • subStr.replaceAll(ESCAPED_DELIMETER, DELIMETER))
• perform the replacement in fewer operations / general performance improvement