JavaScript: Lower precision for a number of queries. #3510
Merged
Conversation
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
|
Obviously, feel free to speak up if there are any queries in here that you think are worth keeping. Two of these queries have associated CWEs; we can keep them on the strength of that, but I think it would be a stretch to call them security queries. |
esbena
previously approved these changes
May 19, 2020
max-schaefer
changed the title
asgerf
reviewed
May 19, 2020
| @@ -23,6 +23,29 @@ | |||
| | Expression has no effect (`js/useless-expression`) | Less results | This query no longer flags an expression when that expression is the only content of the containing file. | | |||
| | Unknown directive (`js/unknown-directive`) | Less results | This query no longer flags directives generated by the Babel compiler. | | |||
|
|
|||
| The following low-precision queries are no longer run by default on LGTM (their results already were not displayed previously): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Saying both "already" and "previously" seems a bit redundant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have removed "previously".
These queries are currently run by default, but don't have their results displayed. Looking through results on LGTM.com, they are either false positives (e.g., `BitwiseSignCheck` which flags many perfectly harmless operations and `CompareIdenticalValues` which mostly flags NaN checks) or harmless results that developers are unlikely to care about (e.g., `EmptyArrayInit` or `MisspelledIdentifier`). With this PR, the only queries that are still run but not displayed are security queries, where different considerations may apply.
max-schaefer
force-pushed
the
cull-boring-queries
branch
from
f691429 to
a803120
Compare
asgerf
approved these changes
May 19, 2020
|
@esbena, can I get a re-approval? |
esbena
approved these changes
May 19, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
These queries are currently run by default, but don't have their results displayed.
Looking through results on LGTM.com, they are either false positives (e.g.,
BitwiseSignCheckwhich flags many perfectly harmless operations andCompareIdenticalValueswhich mostly flags NaN checks) or harmless results that developers are unlikely to care about (e.g.,EmptyArrayInitorMisspelledIdentifier).With this PR, the only queries that are still run but not displayed are security queries, where different considerations may apply.