Turns out tests break down to 3.6.0

These are the changes that broke everything

prettier/prettier@3.5.3...3.6.0#diff-bf85368341ee12e4012b1f33017fb86ea8ef03356d8a5f9d7be590cb7d1b98f9R34

prettier/prettier@3.5.3...3.6.0#diff-bf85368341ee12e4012b1f33017fb86ea8ef03356d8a5f9d7be590cb7d1b98f9R57

Flipping these to true fixes everything.

Can live with the ranges not being there, easy enough to grab them from start and end.

Can't live with comments not being included. We (for reasons I don't understand yet) have all our template stuff come out as CommentBlocks. When attachComment is false we get none of them come through.

Down to 24 failures. Majority of them because // prettier-ignore is ignored. I guess because of that attachComments being false.

// prettier-ignore seems to work when I run the tests in CI but not locally

apparently only 7 failures in CI 🤔

edit: I was running 3.6.0 locally, it seems 3.7.1 (or a version in between) fixed some things.

the last 7 failures are down to a change in prettier I think, not sure

when a template is passed as an arg to a function eg

render(
  <template>
    Hello
  </template>
);

Prettier now collapses the whitespace around the arg resulting in

render(<template>
  Hello
</template>)

I'm not sure if this is an ok change we can accept or not?

One of those failures is a random semi-colon being inserted 😢

- Expected
+ Received

@@ -5,9 +5,9 @@
    Args: {}
    Yields: []
  }

  // prettier-ignore
- <template>
+ ;<template>
                what
              </template> as TemplateOnlyComponent<Signature>
  "

why?

I've opened an issue with prettier, if they can revert the change this PR becomes much simpler in that it just needs to fix the missing range property.

Otherwise I'll have to keep at it and figure out these last couple of issues.

By changing the comments to an object we get a different AST, which is causing the last issues because they are not identifying as an isGlimmerTemplateParent (I think). If anyone else can figure out how to make it work this way, then please, have a go.

Superceded by #408