Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork2.8k
feat(eslint-plugin): [consistent-generic-constructors] add rule#4924
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.
Changes fromall commits
8e5d39fdf8de5caa7c312c6434c77e29ee385b851c33cb2d3ba54b9e46de101867152ac40ab67ff8dfc72110540119393c371983e5e4922263e4cb9be2f1af1bdedecFile filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Jump to
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@ | ||
| # `consistent-generic-constructors` | ||
| Enforces specifying generic type arguments on type annotation or constructor name of a constructor call. | ||
| When constructing a generic class, you can specify the type arguments on either the left-hand side (as a type annotation) or the right-hand side (as part of the constructor call): | ||
| ```ts | ||
| // Left-hand side | ||
| const map: Map<string, number> = new Map(); | ||
| // Right-hand side | ||
| const map = new Map<string, number>(); | ||
| ``` | ||
| This rule ensures that type arguments appear consistently on one side of the declaration. | ||
| ## Options | ||
| ```jsonc | ||
| { | ||
| "rules": { | ||
| "@typescript-eslint/consistent-generic-constructors": [ | ||
| "error", | ||
| "constructor" | ||
| ] | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
| This rule takes a string option: | ||
| - If it's set to `constructor` (default), type arguments that **only** appear on the type annotation are disallowed. | ||
| - If it's set to `type-annotation`, type arguments that **only** appear on the constructor are disallowed. | ||
Comment on lines +32 to +33 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more. this is a nitpick / personal preference personally I have found that an object for the options is better than a string. Using an object is also nice as it is self-documenting in a way. i.e. MemberAuthor
| ||
| ## Rule Details | ||
| The rule never reports when there are type parameters on both sides, or neither sides of the declaration. It also doesn't report if the names of the type annotation and the constructor don't match. | ||
| ### `constructor` | ||
| <!--tabs--> | ||
| #### ❌ Incorrect | ||
| ```ts | ||
| const map: Map<string, number> = new Map(); | ||
| const set: Set<string> = new Set(); | ||
| ``` | ||
| #### ✅ Correct | ||
| ```ts | ||
| const map = new Map<string, number>(); | ||
| const map: Map<string, number> = new MyMap(); | ||
| const set = new Set<string>(); | ||
| const set = new Set(); | ||
| const set: Set<string> = new Set<string>(); | ||
| ``` | ||
| ### `type-annotation` | ||
| <!--tabs--> | ||
| #### ❌ Incorrect | ||
| ```ts | ||
| const map = new Map<string, number>(); | ||
| const set = new Set<string>(); | ||
| ``` | ||
| #### ✅ Correct | ||
| ```ts | ||
| const map: Map<string, number> = new Map(); | ||
| const set: Set<string> = new Set(); | ||
| const set = new Set(); | ||
| const set: Set<string> = new Set<string>(); | ||
| ``` | ||
| ## When Not To Use It | ||
| You can turn this rule off if you don't want to enforce one kind of generic constructor style over the other. | ||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,104 @@ | ||
| import { AST_NODE_TYPES } from '@typescript-eslint/utils'; | ||
| import { createRule } from '../util'; | ||
| type MessageIds = 'preferTypeAnnotation' | 'preferConstructor'; | ||
| type Options = ['type-annotation' | 'constructor']; | ||
| export default createRule<Options, MessageIds>({ | ||
| name: 'consistent-generic-constructors', | ||
| meta: { | ||
| type: 'suggestion', | ||
| docs: { | ||
| description: | ||
| 'Enforce specifying generic type arguments on type annotation or constructor name of a constructor call', | ||
| recommended: 'strict', | ||
| }, | ||
| messages: { | ||
| preferTypeAnnotation: | ||
| 'The generic type arguments should be specified as part of the type annotation.', | ||
| preferConstructor: | ||
| 'The generic type arguments should be specified as part of the constructor type arguments.', | ||
| }, | ||
| fixable: 'code', | ||
| schema: [ | ||
| { | ||
| enum: ['type-annotation', 'constructor'], | ||
| }, | ||
| ], | ||
| }, | ||
| defaultOptions: ['constructor'], | ||
| create(context, [mode]) { | ||
| const sourceCode = context.getSourceCode(); | ||
| return { | ||
| VariableDeclarator(node): void { | ||
| const lhs = node.id.typeAnnotation?.typeAnnotation; | ||
| const rhs = node.init; | ||
| if ( | ||
| !rhs || | ||
| rhs.type !== AST_NODE_TYPES.NewExpression || | ||
| rhs.callee.type !== AST_NODE_TYPES.Identifier | ||
| ) { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| if ( | ||
| lhs && | ||
| (lhs.type !== AST_NODE_TYPES.TSTypeReference || | ||
| lhs.typeName.type !== AST_NODE_TYPES.Identifier || | ||
| lhs.typeName.name !== rhs.callee.name) | ||
Comment on lines +46 to +47 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more. question: do we want to handle namespaced names like There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more. Yeah we should... is there a utility function to match potentially nested qualified names? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more. We don't - I don't think it's something we do all that much! There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more. Let's leave it off for now - we can add it in later. | ||
| ) { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| if (mode === 'type-annotation') { | ||
| if (!lhs && rhs.typeParameters) { | ||
| const { typeParameters, callee } = rhs; | ||
| const typeAnnotation = | ||
| sourceCode.getText(callee) + sourceCode.getText(typeParameters); | ||
| context.report({ | ||
| node, | ||
| messageId: 'preferTypeAnnotation', | ||
| fix(fixer) { | ||
| return [ | ||
| fixer.remove(typeParameters), | ||
| fixer.insertTextAfter(node.id, ': ' + typeAnnotation), | ||
| ]; | ||
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
| } | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| if (mode === 'constructor') { | ||
| if (lhs?.typeParameters && !rhs.typeParameters) { | ||
| const hasParens = | ||
| sourceCode.getTokenAfter(rhs.callee)?.value === '('; | ||
| const extraComments = new Set( | ||
| sourceCode.getCommentsInside(lhs.parent!), | ||
| ); | ||
| sourceCode | ||
| .getCommentsInside(lhs.typeParameters) | ||
| .forEach(c => extraComments.delete(c)); | ||
| context.report({ | ||
| node, | ||
| messageId: 'preferConstructor', | ||
| *fix(fixer) { | ||
| yield fixer.remove(lhs.parent!); | ||
| for (const comment of extraComments) { | ||
| yield fixer.insertTextAfter( | ||
| rhs.callee, | ||
| sourceCode.getText(comment), | ||
| ); | ||
| } | ||
| yield fixer.insertTextAfter( | ||
| rhs.callee, | ||
| sourceCode.getText(lhs.typeParameters), | ||
| ); | ||
| if (!hasParens) { | ||
| yield fixer.insertTextAfter(rhs.callee, '()'); | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| }; | ||
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.