-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
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
fix(eslint-plugin): [no-extra-semi] false negatives when used with eslint 8.3.0 #4458
Conversation
Thanks for the PR, @ota-meshi! typescript-eslint is a 100% community driven project, and we are incredibly grateful that you are contributing to that community. The core maintainers work on this in their personal time, so please understand that it may not be possible for them to review your work immediately. Thanks again! 🙏 Please, if you or your company is finding typescript-eslint valuable, help us sustain the project by sponsoring it transparently on https://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint. As a thank you, your profile/company logo will be added to our main README which receives thousands of unique visitors per day. |
✔️ Deploy Preview for typescript-eslint ready! 🔨 Explore the source changes: 69311fd 🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/typescript-eslint/deploys/61e52fb5f3988300081094d3 😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-4458--typescript-eslint.netlify.app |
I need to include the #4448 change to fix the CI errors. |
I merged the main branch into this PR. |
Will you enable the codepath additions from #4448 in here? Or will that happen in a third PR? |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4458 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 94.38% 92.38% -2.01%
==========================================
Files 154 346 +192
Lines 8107 11633 +3526
Branches 2583 3308 +725
==========================================
+ Hits 7652 10747 +3095
- Misses 255 619 +364
- Partials 200 267 +67
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
I will not add it in this PR. I think it needs a feature request. |
So we need a feature request for the code you have added in the previous PR but commented out because you wanted to update the ESLint version here? I think I might not have been clear enough in my previous message. I am just talking about un-commenting lines 714 and 715 of the eslint-rules typings file. Or is that not a working solution for #4444? |
For the same reason as #4448, I find it difficult to prevent loss of coverage for this PR. |
@WikiRik However, the rules provided by typescript-eslint do not currently have rules that use the API (directly), so no type definition is needed either. If you want to create a rule that uses Code Path Analysis and want to use the type definition provided by typescript-eslint, you'll need to request a feature. |
Ah, so if I understand correctly it's not part of the solution for #4444. Then it's all good to me. Thanks for your work on these issues! |
@WikiRik we don't need to worry about doing anything to the extension rule. The new code-path analysis selectors do not change the overrides we need to apply. If it did - then the tests would be failing, which they are not. In a nuttshell - previously the rule used explicit node selectors on things like functions to trigger the analysis. Our extension rule didn't touch that logic - it just augmented it so it could track Now the base rule uses the codepath selectors instead, but the overall logic doesn't change, thus nothing to change on our end aside from making sure we don't call undefined functions. |
PR Checklist
Overview
This PR modifies to call the changed method name of the
no-extra-semi
core rule.This issue was found while working on #4448.
#4448 (comment)