feat: create require-hook rule
#929
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
create-no-unhooked-function-calls
branch
from
175f0a4
to
bbb173c
Compare
|
I'm wondering if this rule should have a For the above you could argue that But I wouldn't be surprised if some folks found it too noisy, due to having builder functions that are returning static values? 馃 |
SimenB
changed the title
require-hook rule
|
馃帀 This PR is included in version 24.7.0 馃帀 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 馃摝馃殌 |
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 10, 2021
# [25.0.0-next.6](v25.0.0-next.5...v25.0.0-next.6) (2021-10-10) ### Bug Fixes * **lowercase-name:** consider skip and only prefixes for ignores ([#923](#923)) ([8716c24](8716c24)) * **prefer-to-be:** don't consider RegExp literals as `toBe`-able ([#922](#922)) ([99b6d42](99b6d42)) ### Features * create `require-hook` rule ([#929](#929)) ([6204b31](6204b31)) * deprecate `prefer-to-be-null` rule ([4db9161](4db9161)) * deprecate `prefer-to-be-undefined` rule ([fa08f09](fa08f09)) * **valid-expect-in-promise:** re-implement rule ([#916](#916)) ([7a49c58](7a49c58))
|
馃帀 This PR is included in version 25.0.0-next.6 馃帀 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 馃摝馃殌 |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
tbh this was a bit of a no-brainer to have as a rule - the more I think about it and check my existing tests, the more I think "yeah there's no reason that can't/shouldn't be wrapped in a before hook" 馃槄
The docs should explain the important stuff - namely, that this rule flags pretty much all common "action" statements like re-assignments and function calls that are not within a hook.
I have excluded function calls on the
jestglobal, likejest.mockbut suspect some of those should actually also always be within a hook function?I also think we should probably make this a recommended rule, but understand if you don't want to delay the new major any further.
Closes #752