Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork2.8k
test(eslint-plugin): [no-unnecessary-type-assertion] add missing tests for asserting enums#10807
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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
Thanks for the PR,@ronami! 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 onhttps://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint. |
netlifybot commentedFeb 6, 2025 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
✅ Deploy Preview fortypescript-eslint ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to yourNetlify site configuration. |
nx-cloudbot commentedFeb 6, 2025 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
View yourCI Pipeline Execution ↗ for commit6320bb3.
☁️Nx Cloud last updated this comment at |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
28f95cd
intotypescript-eslint:mainUh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
PR Checklist
Overview
This PR follows up on the discussion in#7652 (comment) and adds the relevant missing tests. This is a bit different than what the issue describes, as the issue seems to have been resolved in#8558.
I'll add that there are some inconsistencies with how the rule treats literals (enums included), I wrote some thoughts about this in#10631.