Set the start dir of looking for tsconfig to process.cwd()

[Bnaya]

Mimic jest behaviour to find package.json (and his config inside it)

See
https://github.com/facebook/jest/blob/d62a7e0edfec556758e1c0e23158e4ce4ac84e91/packages/jest-runtime/src/cli/index.js#L60-L68
https://github.com/facebook/jest/blob/e04e45102b3ebe486462d45db656f9b47f0e70e1/packages/jest-config/src/index.js#L18-L26

resolved #347

[Bnaya]

The failed test is:

 FAIL  tests/__tests__/synthetic-default-imports.spec.ts
  ● synthetic default imports › should not work when the compiler option is false
    expect(string).toContain(value)
    
    Expected string:
      "FAIL __tests__/module.test.ts
      the module which has no default export
        ✕ should return funky junk when trying to access its exports (113ms)
    
      ● the module which has no default export › should return funky junk when trying to access its exports
    
        TypeError: Cannot read property 'someExport' of undefined
          
          at Object.<anonymous> (__tests__/module.test.ts:6:16)
              at new Promise (<anonymous>)
              at <anonymous>
    
    Test Suites: 1 failed, 1 total
    Tests:       1 failed, 1 total
    Snapshots:   0 total
    Time:        1.619s
    Ran all test suites.
    "
    To contain value:
      "module.test.ts:6:15"

module.test.ts:6:16 and not module.test.ts:6:15

No idea why... should i just change the expected value?

[kulshekhar]

If we're using process.cwd(), there's no need for the getStartDir function at all. process.cwd() is synonymous with . so the conditions in the function don't make any sense.

It would be better to remove this function and replace all calls to getStartDir with process.cwd(). Alternatively, just replace the contents of getStartDir with

return process.cwd()

[Bnaya]

it seems like that to me but,
When i change the function to just return process.cwd()
more test fails

I assume it because absolute and relative paths are handled differently in some point in the code.
If its important i can try to figure what's going on.

[kulshekhar]

You're right. This change is good in its current form.

[kulshekhar]

No idea why... should i just change the expected value?

I'm not sure what's happening because this is failing only for Node v8 and just on Linux. I'll have to take a closer look. I'll also have to take a closer look at how this affects the fix for lerna projects ( #342 )

[kulshekhar]

@Bnaya just some minor things

• add your name to the AUTHORS file (in alphabetical order)
• bump the version patch in package.json so that this can be published to npm right away

The change was correct

[Bnaya]

What about the failing test?

[kulshekhar]

I've pushed a change for that

[Bnaya]

Done,
No idea why appveyor is failing :X

[kulshekhar]

I've rerun the test on appveyor and it looks like it'll pass now. I have no idea what happened.

[kulshekhar]

This has been published.

Thanks @Bnaya :)

[Bnaya]

Thank you for this great tool!!