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

always use latest ecmaVersion #57

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 2, 2022
Merged

Conversation

dbushong
Copy link
Member

@dbushong dbushong commented Feb 1, 2022

We're happy for eslint to fail on rules, but there's no reason for it to
fail to parse. This will e.g. get us support for ?. the optional
chaining operator.


This PR was started by: git wf pr

We're happy for eslint to fail on rules, but there's no reason for it to
fail to parse.  This will e.g. get us support for `?.` the optional
chaining operator.
Copy link
Member

@aotarola aotarola left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💚

@dbushong dbushong merged commit 36670a5 into main Feb 2, 2022
@dbushong dbushong deleted the dbushong/feature/main/ecmaversion branch February 2, 2022 00:48
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.

None yet

2 participants