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: improve rule schemas, add test to validate schemas, add tooling to generate schema types#6899
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
… to generate schema types
Thanks for the PR,@bradzacher! 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 commentedApr 13, 2023 • 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 settings. |
nx-cloudbot commentedApr 13, 2023 • 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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
codecovbot commentedApr 14, 2023 • 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.
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@## v6 #6899 +/- ##==========================================- Coverage 87.51% 87.50% -0.01%========================================== Files 376 376 Lines 12940 12936 -4 Branches 3820 3820 ==========================================- Hits 11324 11320 -4 Misses 1231 1231 Partials 385 385
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown.Click here to find out more.
|
packages/eslint-plugin/tests/schema-snapshots/type-annotation-spacing.shotShow resolvedHide resolved
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
packages/eslint-plugin/tests/schema-snapshots/padding-line-between-statements.shotShow resolvedHide resolved
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
packages/website/src/components/editor/createProvideCodeActions.ts OutdatedShow resolvedHide resolved
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
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.
also what armano2 said 😄 - but this looks great so far! I'll take a deeper look upon re-request
@@ -71,6 +71,42 @@ See our docs on [type aware linting](./Typed_Linting.mdx) for more information. | |||
You're using an outdated version of `@typescript-eslint/parser`. | |||
Update to the latest version to see a more informative version of this error message, explained [above](#i-get-errors-telling-me-eslint-was-configured-to-run--however-that-tsconfig-does-not--none-of-those-tsconfigs-include-this-file 'backlink to I get errors telling me ESLint was configured to run ...'). | |||
## How do I turn on a `@typescript-eslint` rule? |
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.
Meant for another PR?
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.
Intentionally added as part of cleaning up the holistic docs update in this PR.
We've seen this asked a few times and the ESLint team doesn't think their docs are unclear, so as part of improving the rule config docs - this FAQ article to quick-link people to.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
packages/eslint-plugin/tests/schema-snapshots/naming-convention.shot OutdatedShow resolvedHide resolved
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
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.
this looks awesome, thank you for you hard work
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Overview
@JoshuaKGoldberg I went through with my threat for no reason other than it seemed fun.
Previously we used
json-schema-to-typescript
to generate our types, however we have found that the package has a number of edge-cases that don't do what we want. Attempting to change the package is... difficult because it is built to be super flexible so it can attempt to handle every single permutation and valid state of a JSON schema.However in reality we don't actually need all that power - just a fraction of it because rule schemas are some degree of sane (usually... at least our are). This means we can easily constrain the transformation code and thus simplify it significantly.
This PR:
This has the added benefit that we can validate the types that will get embedded in the website without needing to do a website build - which is a nice, quick sanity check.
Note: I purposely haven't written tests for the tool as it's pretty extensively tested by running on our rules already. I didn't see any need in additional tests.