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

`no-void` should have an option to allow void arrow functions or void async IIFEs #12688

slikts opened this issue Dec 19, 2019 · 3 comments


Copy link

@slikts slikts commented Dec 19, 2019

The void operator is commonly regarded as a legacy language feature and is disabled in popular style guides (standard/standard#1464, airbnb/javascript#2145), but it does have legit and current use cases. Mainly, it can be used to make non-value-returning arrow functions explicit:

const log = x => void console.log(x);

The no-void rule should have an option to allow void in arrow functions like this.

To a lesser degree, it could be useful to also allow it for async IIFEs.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@kaicataldo kaicataldo commented Dec 19, 2019

Can you please fill out the issue template requested? You can find it here. Thanks.

@kaicataldo kaicataldo added evaluating and removed triage labels Dec 19, 2019
@eslint eslint bot closed this Jan 19, 2020
@eslint eslint bot added the auto closed label Jan 19, 2020

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@eslint eslint bot commented Jan 19, 2020

Unfortunately, it looks like there wasn't enough interest from the team
or community to implement this change. While we wish we'd be able to
accommodate everyone's requests, we do need to prioritize. We've found
that issues failing to reach accepted status after 21 days tend to
never be accepted, and as such, we close those issues.
This doesn't mean the idea isn't interesting or useful, just that it's
not something the team can commit to.

Thanks for contributing to ESLint and we appreciate your understanding.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@G-Rath G-Rath commented Mar 9, 2020

I have created a new issue based off this one that follows the issue template: #13020

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.