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): [no-misused-promises] check array predicate return#9955
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,@yeonjuan! 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 commentedSep 9, 2024 • 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 commentedSep 9, 2024 • 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.
codecovbot commentedSep 9, 2024 • 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 ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #9955 +/- ##==========================================+ Coverage 88.67% 88.69% +0.01%========================================== Files 425 426 +1 Lines 14799 14820 +21 Branches 4304 4310 +6 ==========================================+ Hits 13123 13144 +21 Misses 1533 1533 Partials 143 143
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown.Click here to find out more.
|
node.callee.property.type === AST_NODE_TYPES.Identifier && | ||
ARRAY_PREDICATE_FUNCTIONS.has(node.callee.property.name) |
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.
node.callee.property.type===AST_NODE_TYPES.Identifier&& | |
ARRAY_PREDICATE_FUNCTIONS.has(node.callee.property.name) | |
ARRAY_PREDICATE_FUNCTIONS.has(getStaticMemberAccessValue(node.callee)) |
[Refactor] Now that#9836 is already merged, we can use a nice utility function for this!
return tsutils | ||
.typeParts(type) | ||
.some(t => checker.isArrayType(t) || checker.isTupleType(t)); |
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.
[Bug] I think we should useunionTypeParts
andintersectionTypeParts
here, because the rule doesn't report on this code:
declareconstarray:(string[]&{foo:'bar'})|(number[]&{bar:'foo'})array.every(()=>Promise.resolve(true));
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.
Cool!
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.
Love being reminded about the array hardcodings 😄
454d37e
intotypescript-eslint:mainUh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
PR Checklist
Overview