perf(nuxt): decrease if checks when prerendering #32455

djixadin · 2025-06-23T08:36:30Z

🔗 Linked issue

📚 Description

bolt-new-by-stackblitz · 2025-06-23T08:36:33Z

Run & review this pull request in StackBlitz Codeflow.

coderabbitai · 2025-06-23T08:37:41Z

Walkthrough

The change refactors the way the tag position for script tags is determined in the server-side rendering head context. Instead of using an inline conditional expression to set the tag position property within each script object, the conditional logic is moved to a separate constant named tagPosition. This constant is then used when pushing script objects to the head context. The overall logic and behaviour remain unchanged, and there are no modifications to exported or public entities.

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a7d21ec and 8821e60.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

packages/nuxt/src/core/runtime/nitro/handlers/renderer.ts (1 hunks)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (4)

GitHub Check: codeql (actions)
GitHub Check: codeql (javascript-typescript)
GitHub Check: build
GitHub Check: code

🔇 Additional comments (3)

packages/nuxt/src/core/runtime/nitro/handlers/renderer.ts (3)

251-251: Good refactoring for readability.

Extracting the conditional logic into a named constant improves code readability and makes the logic more explicit.

260-260: Proper usage of the extracted constant.

The tagPosition constant is correctly used here, maintaining the same conditional logic as before whilst improving readability.

124-124: PR title doesn't match the actual changes.

The PR title mentions "reduce multiple calls to getRenderer", but I only see one call to getRenderer on this line, and the changes don't affect this call. The actual changes are about refactoring the tagPosition assignment for script tags (lines 251 and 260).

Could you clarify whether:

The PR title is incorrect and should reflect the tagPosition refactoring, or

There are additional changes planned to reduce getRenderer calls that haven't been included in this PR?
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for all calls to getRenderer in the codebase to verify if there are multiple calls that could be optimised

# Search for getRenderer function calls
rg -A 3 -B 3 "getRenderer\(" --type ts --type js
Likely an incorrect or invalid review comment.

✨ Finishing Touches

📝 Generate Docstrings

🧪 Generate Unit Tests

Create PR with Unit Tests
Post Copyable Unit Tests in Comment

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
- I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
- Explain this complex logic.
- Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
- @coderabbitai explain this code block.
- @coderabbitai modularize this function.
PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
- @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
- @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
- @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

@coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
@coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
@coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
@coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
@coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
@coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
@coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
@coderabbitai auto-generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
@coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
@coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
@coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`)

You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

pkg-pr-new · 2025-06-23T08:40:06Z

Open in StackBlitz

@nuxt/kit

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@nuxt/kit@32455

nuxt

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/nuxt@32455

@nuxt/rspack-builder

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@nuxt/rspack-builder@32455

@nuxt/schema

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@nuxt/schema@32455

@nuxt/vite-builder

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@nuxt/vite-builder@32455

@nuxt/webpack-builder

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@nuxt/webpack-builder@32455

commit: 8821e60

danielroe · 2025-06-23T08:41:15Z

packages/nuxt/src/core/runtime/nitro/handlers/renderer.ts

@@ -248,14 +248,16 @@ export default defineRenderHandler(async (event): Promise<Partial<RenderResponse

  // 6. Scripts
  if (!routeOptions.noScripts) {
+    const tagPosition = (_PAYLOAD_EXTRACTION && !process.env.NUXT_JSON_PAYLOADS) ? 'bodyClose' : 'head'


I think this is worth doing but there should not be any very significant benefit of doing so.

in production this is optimised to a constant, and when prerendering it's a simple ternary.

was there an issue you were hoping to solve, or did you just spot the possible optimisation?

codspeed-hq · 2025-06-23T08:50:20Z

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #32455 will not alter performance

_{Comparing djixadin:renderer-small-optim (8821e60) with main (a7d21ec)}

Summary

✅ 10 untouched benchmarks

reduce multiple calls to getRenderer in renderer.ts

8821e60

djixadin requested a review from danielroe as a code owner June 23, 2025 08:36

github-actions bot added the 4.x label Jun 23, 2025

danielroe reviewed Jun 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

danielroe changed the title ~~reduce multiple calls to getRenderer in renderer.ts~~ perf(nuxt): decrease if checks when prerendering Jun 23, 2025

danielroe approved these changes Jun 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

danielroe merged commit 1daadfa into nuxt:main Jun 23, 2025
119 of 122 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jun 23, 2025

v4.0.0 #27716

Merged

danielroe pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 1, 2025

perf(nuxt): decrease if checks when prerendering (#32455)

c82794a

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jul 1, 2025

v3.17.6 #32346

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

perf(nuxt): decrease if checks when prerendering #32455

perf(nuxt): decrease if checks when prerendering #32455

Uh oh!

djixadin commented Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

bolt-new-by-stackblitz bot commented Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Jun 23, 2025

Chat

Support

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

Other keywords and placeholders

CodeRabbit Configuration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`)

Documentation and Community

Uh oh!

pkg-pr-new bot commented Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

danielroe Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

perf(nuxt): decrease if checks when prerendering #32455

perf(nuxt): decrease if checks when prerendering #32455

Uh oh!

Conversation

djixadin commented Jun 23, 2025

🔗 Linked issue

📚 Description

Uh oh!

bolt-new-by-stackblitz bot commented Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Jun 23, 2025

Walkthrough

Chat

Support

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

Other keywords and placeholders

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

Documentation and Community

Uh oh!

pkg-pr-new bot commented Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

danielroe Jun 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Jun 23, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #32455 will not alter performance

Summary

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

CodeRabbit Configuration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`)