alphabetize rule should cover exports as well #18
Conversation
...neovim didn't like the directory accoutrements
| } | ||
| var exportNames = rawExportNames.filter(removeExemptions); | ||
| if (exportNames.find(checkOrderOfKeysIn(exportNames))) { | ||
| context.report({message: "Exports with "+limit+" or more specifiers should have specifiers in alphabetical order. (Saw "+rawExportNames.length+")", node: node}); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we create the message using template strings?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I had been keeping this as plain-JS as possible, with the hopes that it'll be able to work on as older versions of JS/ES... But that might not be as not as important as the readability that template strings and arrow functions offer?
alxndr
changed the title
...perhaps this should be a separate rule? [fixes #8]
.ignore
Outdated
| @@ -1,2 +1 @@ | |||
| ./node_modules/ | |||
|
|
|||
| node_modules/ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can probably remove the trailing slash here
|
|
||
| This codebase attempts to follow [Semantic Versioning]. | ||
|
|
||
| 1. One or more *approved* Pull Requests are merged to the `master` branch. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
More of a FYI but I'm a big fan of always using 1. for all items in an MD ordered list to keep it simple since it will always render the correct order.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm yeah... I like having it be readable in plain-text mode as well, although I suppose having all 1s isn't super unreadable...
The current implementation of alphabetize-properties does not look at the names of specifiers in an export statement. Let's make it report those as well.
[FE-14]