docs: refreshed typescript-eslint package docs, especially tseslint.config #10725
Conversation
|
Thanks for the PR, @JoshuaKGoldberg! typescript-eslint is a 100% community driven project, and we are incredibly grateful that you are contributing to that community. The core maintainers work on this in their personal time, so please understand that it may not be possible for them to review your work immediately. Thanks again! 🙏 Please, if you or your company is finding typescript-eslint valuable, help us sustain the project by sponsoring it transparently on https://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint. |
✅ Deploy Preview for typescript-eslint ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
|
View your CI Pipeline Execution ↗ for commit 0d225dc.
☁️ Nx Cloud last updated this comment at |
| @@ -204,12 +99,15 @@ export default [ | |||
| </Tabs> | |||
|
|
|||
| :::note | |||
| We _**strongly**_ recommend using this utility to improve the config authoring experience — however it is entirely optional. By choosing not to use it you lose editor autocomplete and type checking for config files but otherwise it _will not_ impact your ability to use our tooling. | |||
| We _**strongly**_ recommend using this utility to improve the config authoring experience — however it is entirely optional. | |||
| By choosing not to use it you lose editor autocomplete and type checking for config files. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
and also the extends key 🤷
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For now. eslint/rfcs#126 was accepted and eslint/eslint#19116 is in Implementing status. I think mentioning extends won't be accurate for very long.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hmm, but what's scary to me about not mentioning it at all is that eslint/eslint#19116 will have extends with different semantics. Is there a way to preempt that? I'm ok with whatever you think is best here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, true... proposal: can we split this out as a followup issue? I don't have a strong gut feeling on the right way to preempt this.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #10725 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 87.26% 87.30% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 450 450
Lines 15712 15758 +46
Branches 4600 4614 +14
==========================================
+ Hits 13711 13757 +46
Misses 1645 1645
Partials 356 356
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. |
Co-authored-by: Kirk Waiblinger <53019676+kirkwaiblinger@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh - the other thing that I think might be good to mention would be the .flat(Infinity) call that makes the ...spread unnecessary. Same convo as #10725 (comment) I suppose
662e62b
into
typescript-eslint:main
PR Checklist
extendsdescription #9733Overview
Primarily applies two refactors on the page:
config(...)docs much higher, so people are more likely to see themextendsto what's suggested in the issue, rather than the now-no-longer-technically-true variadic function conceptAlso touches up on some other phrasings:
// ...instead of the 2nd+ rule inrules: { ... }s, for brevityno-unsafe-*tono-floating-promisessince it's more commonly known on its own💖