Skip to content
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

Upgrade to eslint 4 #4738

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 1, 2017
Merged

Upgrade to eslint 4 #4738

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 1, 2017

Conversation

benmccann
Copy link
Contributor

I had to add one extra set of parentheses. I filed as an eslint bug for that one: eslint/eslint#9285

Otherwise I fixed all the issues in past PRs

@simonbrunel
Copy link
Member

simonbrunel commented Sep 11, 2017

Do we really want to upgrade to ESLint 4 if it's bugged and forces us a syntax we don't want? what are the benefits?

@benmccann
Copy link
Contributor Author

benmccann commented Sep 12, 2017

ESLint 4 found a good number of real issues as well. I fixed all those in a separate commit earlier: f6b6956

It's only this one place in the code base that there was a regression in behavior. I think all the real issues it found may outweigh having to add parens in one spot

@benmccann
Copy link
Contributor Author

benmccann commented Sep 17, 2017

I've updated this to use the newest eslint with a fix for the bug I reported. It now passes locally without needing the extra set of parens

It's still failing on codeclimate. It must not be using the latest version of eslint. I've sent a PR to upgrade codeclimate: codeclimate/codeclimate-eslint#326

@benmccann
Copy link
Contributor Author

benmccann commented Sep 19, 2017

@simonbrunel I now have eslint 4 working both locally and on codeclimate without any code formatting changes. You should be able to merge this PR now. Thanks for the review and feedback

@etimberg etimberg added this to the Version 2.8 milestone Sep 29, 2017
@benmccann
Copy link
Contributor Author

@etimberg @simonbrunel would we be able to merge this now? Even if we want to have a 2.7.2 I think this PR should still be okay

@etimberg
Copy link
Member

etimberg commented Nov 1, 2017

I am ok with this

@simonbrunel simonbrunel merged commit ffbdb48 into chartjs:master Nov 1, 2017
yofreke pushed a commit to yofreke/Chart.js that referenced this pull request Dec 30, 2017
exwm pushed a commit to exwm/Chart.js that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants