-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 66
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
New: Variable Definition Information of Config Files #17
New: Variable Definition Information of Config Files #17
Conversation
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.
This looks good to me in general.
Do any of the existing Variable
properties need to be deprecated? (Maybe I missed that.)
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.
This generally looks good to me, I have a few minor comments.
designs/2019-variable-definition-information-of-config-files/README.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
designs/2019-variable-definition-information-of-config-files/README.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…EADME.md Co-Authored-By: mysticatea <star.ctor@gmail.com>
- remove `variable.eslintExplicitGlobalComment` and analysis for bc.
Thank you for the review. I updated this RFC:
|
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.
This looks good to me. Thanks!
As a note for implementation, I think we could add the new properties in a semver-minor release and remove the deprecated property in a major release, if needed. (Only noting in case this doesn't make 6.0.0.) Does anyone disagree? |
@platinumazure I agree. I don't think there's a reason to do this as a breaking change. |
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.
Make sense to me. Nice work! 👍
To be clear, while the core changes in this RFC could be done without a breaking change, modifying the defaults of |
Ah, thanks for clarifying. It seems a bit late to try to get another
breaking change in for v6.0.0. I'd be in favor of implementing the
non-breaking part of this proposal and then waiting for v7.0.0 to update
the rule.
…On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 11:57 AM Teddy Katz ***@***.***> wrote:
To be clear, while the core changes in this RFC could be done without a
breaking change, modifying the defaults of no-redeclare would require a
breaking change, and I think that was the main motivation for this
proposal. So we would need to do this before v6.0.0 if we want the
no-redeclare change to be in v6.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#17 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACWkiuzyR9Ms03n-ck_CU7i62a17_Qjks5vVqcWgaJpZM4bcJP1>
.
--
______________________________
Nicholas C. Zakas
@SlickNet
Author, Principles of Object-Oriented JavaScript <http://amzn.to/29Pmfrm>
Author, Understanding ECMAScript 6 <http://amzn.to/29K1mIy>
|
We already accepted the proposal (pending an RFC) as a breaking change for v6.0.0 in the previous TSC meeting. |
Oh geez, thanks for pointing that out. My mind has been mush since the time
change, so I completely forgot about this.
…On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 12:58 PM Teddy Katz ***@***.***> wrote:
We already accepted the proposal (pending an RFC) as a breaking change for
v6.0.0 in the previous TSC meeting
<https://github.com/eslint/tsc-meetings/blob/3e40976a2ebb9481405d4c3a358bc3191ecd234a/notes/2019/2019-02-28.md#proposal-no-redeclare-reports-globals-foo-comments-if-its-redeclaration>
.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#17 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACWkjpPKjbNVGLsBzzXRyLiTHRNYU0nks5vWVh-gaJpZM4bcJP1>
.
--
______________________________
Nicholas C. Zakas
@SlickNet
Author, Principles of Object-Oriented JavaScript <http://amzn.to/29Pmfrm>
Author, Understanding ECMAScript 6 <http://amzn.to/29K1mIy>
|
- Implement eslint/rfcs#17 - Fixes #11370 - Remvoes the access to parserOptions from no-redeclare rule - Adds several tests for lexical bindings to no-redeclare rule
Hi. Thank you for the feedback. I labeled this RFC as "Final Commenting" because over 21 days satisfied. cc: @eslint/eslint-tsc |
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.
Makes sense!
OK, I will merge this RFC because 7 days after final commenting satisfied and looks no objections. Thank you very much! |
Summary
This proposal adds variable definition information of config files to
Variable
objects.Related Issues