fix: add node internals stack frames to ignored list

[huozhi]

What

Previously the node: are implicitly filtered out on error overlay. We should drop that logic instead of moving node:* frames into ignore list so that users can still see it when uncollapse the full stack instead of missing the information. As nodejs internals are also kind of "externals" that users can't do anything with it, so they're "ignored"

Especially in pages router where the errors are still not showing up even you expand the frame.

Expected

This `URL` should be the listed in the expanded frames.

Observed

We filtered it out on the error overlay, so it's not showing up

This PR also move the tests outside of the test/development/acceptance/ReactRefreshLogBox.test.ts to other two testing files

Fixes NDX-555

[huozhi]

• fix: add node internals stack frames to ignored list #73698 👈 (View in Graphite)
• canary

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[ijjk]

Tests Passed

[ijjk]

Stats from current PR

Default Build (Increase detected ⚠️)

General Overall increase ⚠️

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
buildDuration	21.4s	19.3s	N/A
buildDurationCached	18.5s	15.7s	N/A
nodeModulesSize	417 MB	417 MB	⚠️ +7.27 kB
nextStartRea..uration (ms)	527ms	537ms	N/A

Client Bundles (main, webpack)

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
1187-HASH.js gzip	52.6 kB	52.6 kB	N/A
8276.HASH.js gzip	169 B	168 B	N/A
8377-HASH.js gzip	5.44 kB	5.44 kB	N/A
bccd1874-HASH.js gzip	52.9 kB	52.9 kB	N/A
framework-HASH.js gzip	57.5 kB	57.5 kB	N/A
main-app-HASH.js gzip	232 B	235 B	N/A
main-HASH.js gzip	34.1 kB	34.1 kB	N/A
webpack-HASH.js gzip	1.71 kB	1.71 kB	N/A
Overall change	0 B	0 B	✓

Legacy Client Bundles (polyfills)

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
polyfills-HASH.js gzip	39.4 kB	39.4 kB	✓
Overall change	39.4 kB	39.4 kB	✓

Client Pages

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
_app-HASH.js gzip	193 B	193 B	✓
_error-HASH.js gzip	193 B	193 B	✓
amp-HASH.js gzip	512 B	510 B	N/A
css-HASH.js gzip	343 B	342 B	N/A
dynamic-HASH.js gzip	1.84 kB	1.84 kB	✓
edge-ssr-HASH.js gzip	265 B	265 B	✓
head-HASH.js gzip	363 B	362 B	N/A
hooks-HASH.js gzip	393 B	392 B	N/A
image-HASH.js gzip	4.57 kB	4.57 kB	N/A
index-HASH.js gzip	268 B	268 B	✓
link-HASH.js gzip	2.35 kB	2.34 kB	N/A
routerDirect..HASH.js gzip	328 B	328 B	✓
script-HASH.js gzip	397 B	397 B	✓
withRouter-HASH.js gzip	323 B	326 B	N/A
1afbb74e6ecf..834.css gzip	106 B	106 B	✓
Overall change	3.59 kB	3.59 kB	✓

Client Build Manifests

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
_buildManifest.js gzip	749 B	747 B	N/A
Overall change	0 B	0 B	✓

Rendered Page Sizes

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
index.html gzip	524 B	523 B	N/A
link.html gzip	540 B	537 B	N/A
withRouter.html gzip	521 B	520 B	N/A
Overall change	0 B	0 B	✓

Edge SSR bundle Size

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
edge-ssr.js gzip	128 kB	128 kB	N/A
page.js gzip	206 kB	206 kB	N/A
Overall change	0 B	0 B	✓

Middleware size

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
middleware-b..fest.js gzip	670 B	667 B	N/A
middleware-r..fest.js gzip	155 B	156 B	N/A
middleware.js gzip	31.2 kB	31.2 kB	N/A
edge-runtime..pack.js gzip	844 B	844 B	✓
Overall change	844 B	844 B	✓

Next Runtimes

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
274-experime...dev.js gzip	322 B	322 B	✓
274.runtime.dev.js gzip	314 B	314 B	✓
app-page-exp...dev.js gzip	363 kB	363 kB	N/A
app-page-exp..prod.js gzip	129 kB	129 kB	✓
app-page-tur..prod.js gzip	142 kB	142 kB	✓
app-page-tur..prod.js gzip	138 kB	138 kB	✓
app-page.run...dev.js gzip	352 kB	352 kB	N/A
app-page.run..prod.js gzip	125 kB	125 kB	✓
app-route-ex...dev.js gzip	37.5 kB	37.5 kB	✓
app-route-ex..prod.js gzip	25.5 kB	25.5 kB	✓
app-route-tu..prod.js gzip	25.5 kB	25.5 kB	✓
app-route-tu..prod.js gzip	25.4 kB	25.4 kB	✓
app-route.ru...dev.js gzip	39.2 kB	39.2 kB	✓
app-route.ru..prod.js gzip	25.4 kB	25.4 kB	✓
pages-api-tu..prod.js gzip	9.69 kB	9.69 kB	✓
pages-api.ru...dev.js gzip	11.6 kB	11.6 kB	✓
pages-api.ru..prod.js gzip	9.68 kB	9.68 kB	✓
pages-turbo...prod.js gzip	21.7 kB	21.7 kB	✓
pages.runtim...dev.js gzip	27.5 kB	27.5 kB	✓
pages.runtim..prod.js gzip	21.7 kB	21.7 kB	✓
server.runti..prod.js gzip	916 kB	916 kB	✓
Overall change	1.73 MB	1.73 MB	✓

build cache Overall increase ⚠️

	vercel/next.js canary	vercel/next.js 12-09-fix_node_internals_display_on_error_overlay	Change
0.pack gzip	2.08 MB	2.09 MB	⚠️ +4.02 kB
index.pack gzip	74.4 kB	74.3 kB	N/A
Overall change	2.08 MB	2.09 MB	⚠️ +4.02 kB

Diff details

Diff for main-HASH.js

Diff too large to display

Diff for app-page-exp..ntime.dev.js

failed to diff

Diff for app-page.runtime.dev.js

failed to diff

Commit: b24b95f

[eps1lon]

FYI We don't have a solution for ignore-listing node: yet. In the app router, React will automatically filter out node: when replaying errors in the browser anyway. And we're lobbying Chrome to automatically include node: in their default ignore-list but no signal yet.

This screenshot should be the expanded case.

I can't see a screenshot.

[huozhi]

FYI We don't have a solution for ignore-listing node: yet. In the app router, React will automatically filter out node: when replaying errors in the browser anyway. And we're lobbying Chrome to automatically include node: in their default ignore-list but no signal yet.

Yea I was aware of it, so I didn't add the tests for App Router but Pages Router. Since Pages Router error is directly displaying the server error itself rather than replying the server error in browser. The browser environment doesn't have any node runtime so kinda makes sense to filtered out for replying case atm as it's not perfect with Chrome. Thus I was thinking we should probably do it for Pages Router server error because there's no browser replying involved, and it's also a direction we're trying to head to.

[huozhi]

Updated the screenshots comparision in the PR description