-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.8k
feat(eslint-plugin): [naming-convention] add support for "override" and "async" modifiers (#5310) #5610
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
JoshuaKGoldberg
merged 4 commits into
typescript-eslint:main
from
eliasm307:naming-convention-Add-override-modifier-support
Nov 7, 2022
Merged
feat(eslint-plugin): [naming-convention] add support for "override" and "async" modifiers (#5310) #5610
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
58dbdaf
feat(eslint-plugin): [naming-convention] add support for "override" a…
eliasm307 b3446d6
apply pr feedback ie remove test case util, split tests by type, remo…
eliasm307 f59a7f3
remove async parameter logic which is impossible
eliasm307 3a2086d
Merge branch 'main' into naming-convention-Add-override-modifier-support
JoshuaKGoldberg File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking at this again: we generally try not to use this string
in
checking pattern, as it's a little imprecise. We normally check for specific types. But I can see why you did it here (much less code!), and there's already an instance of it in the file.I think it's fine to check in as-is, and we should separately look into making a lint rule internally that flags this kind of check.
I also think I'd meant to post this in the first review but forgot 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree, and its not great for readability also, its not really clear what the intent of the
in
is, in terms of what node types its trying to check for, but I went with it since it was used everywhere in that fileYeah I don't do it like this usually, but I was also surprised how short the code gets, but I'm still a fan of the type utils for better communication (but please don't ask me change it now😅)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Haha don't worry, I won't 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
eslint-community/eslint-plugin-eslint-plugin#326