-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 87
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
Potential rule duplication #522
Comments
I don't think we need a new rule. If |
I think that should be the case as well, that is, if it doesn't do it at the moment it should. 😄 |
I just checked and the style rule does check for both 🥳 , see here. |
I wasn't talking about the check itself, but the rule name. :) It was simply a new alias... |
Aaah, I misunderstood then. I think it's probably better to have a single one to avoid confusion. I just updated the documentation so it mentions both spellings. |
Got it. Thanks. |
Do you think having a rule
no_behaviour_info
(with au
) would make sense? It would simply be an alias forno_behavior_info
. [I don't want to get into an argument over the English language, since I don't have a preference...]I remember being surprised, a few years back, when I discovered that both spellings worked the same for
erlang
. I think, at a given moment in time, about 10 years ago,dialyzer
would complain about missing stuff if the spelling wasbehavior
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: