typescript-eslint/typescript-eslintPublic

NotificationsYou must be signed in to change notification settings
Fork2.8k
Star15.8k

feat(eslint-plugin): [no-base-to-string] add checkUnknown Option#11128

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

Jump to bottom

Merged

JoshuaKGoldberg merged 8 commits intotypescript-eslint:mainfromdeveloper-bandi:feat/no-base-to-string

Jun 23, 2025

Merged

feat(eslint-plugin): [no-base-to-string] add checkUnknown Option#11128

JoshuaKGoldberg merged 8 commits intotypescript-eslint:mainfromdeveloper-bandi:feat/no-base-to-string

Jun 23, 2025

+231 −11

Conversation

Copy link

Contributor

developer-bandi commentedMay 4, 2025•
edited by kirkwaiblinger
Loading

PR Checklist

Addresses an existing open issue:fixesBug: [no-base-to-string] False negative forunknown type #10862
That issue was marked asaccepting prs
Steps inContributing were taken

Overview

add checkUnknown option.

One thing I'm curious about is, is it correct to treat generic types as unknown?

functionfoo<T>(x:T){String(x);}

feat: add type and option

efb5f30

Copy link

Contributor

typescript-eslintbot commentedMay 4, 2025

Thanks for the PR,@developer-bandi!

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.

developer-bandi marked this pull request as draft

May 4, 2025 15:33

Copy link

netlifybot commentedMay 4, 2025•
edited
Loading

✅ Deploy Preview fortypescript-eslint ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	`a098114`
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/typescript-eslint/deploys/685987280df69f00098e6b9a
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-11128--typescript-eslint.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.
Lighthouse	1 paths audited Performance: 99 (🟢 up 1 from production) Accessibility: 100 (no change from production) Best Practices: 100 (no change from production) SEO: 98 (🔴 down 2 from production) PWA: 80 (no change from production) View the detailed breakdown and full score reports

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to yourNetlify project configuration.

Copy link

nx-cloudbot commentedMay 4, 2025•
edited
Loading

View yourCI Pipeline Execution ↗ for commita098114.

Command	Status	Duration	Result
`nx test eslint-plugin --coverage=false`	✅ Succeeded	5m 3s	View ↗
`nx run-many -t typecheck`	✅ Succeeded	2m 10s	View ↗
`nx run integration-tests:test`	✅ Succeeded	<1s	View ↗
`nx run types:build`	✅ Succeeded	1s	View ↗
`nx test typescript-estree --coverage=false`	✅ Succeeded	<1s	View ↗
`nx run-many -t lint`	✅ Succeeded	13s	View ↗
`nx run generate-configs`	✅ Succeeded	7s	View ↗
`nx test eslint-plugin-internal --coverage=false`	✅ Succeeded	<1s	View ↗
`Additional runs (27)`	✅ Succeeded	...	View ↗

☁️Nx Cloud last updated this comment at2025-06-23 17:07:54 UTC

feat: apply checkUnknown option and test case

d601fd3

developer-bandi marked this pull request as ready for review

May 6, 2025 06:18

JoshuaKGoldberg changed the title~~feat(eslint-plugin): [no-base-to-string] add restrictUnknown Option~~feat(eslint-plugin): [no-base-to-string] add checkUnknown Option

May 12, 2025

JoshuaKGoldberg reviewed

May 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

packages/eslint-plugin/src/rules/no-base-to-string.tsShow resolvedHide resolved

JoshuaKGoldberg approved these changes

May 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

Copy link

Member

JoshuaKGoldberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks!

Could you please get a passing CI so we can merge this though?

JoshuaKGoldberg requested changes

May 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

Copy link

Member

JoshuaKGoldberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(wrong button)

fix: ci error

3bdc647

Copy link

codecovbot commentedMay 18, 2025•
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 90.84%. Comparing base(bca8a91) to head(a098114).
Report is 112 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@##             main   #11128      +/-   ##==========================================- Coverage   90.84%   90.84%   -0.01%==========================================  Files         497      501       +4       Lines       50320    50919     +599       Branches     8311     8386      +75     ==========================================+ Hits        45714    46256     +542- Misses       4591     4648      +57  Partials       15       15

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittest	`90.84% <100.00%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown.Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...kages/eslint-plugin/src/rules/no-base-to-string.ts	`98.93% <100.00%> (+0.03%)`	⬆️

... and31 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link

ContributorAuthor

developer-bandi commentedMay 18, 2025

LGTM, thanks!
Could you please get a passing CI so we can merge this though?

I added an option description to the document because there was an error that occurred not only in the CI error but also in the document due to not adding the option.