-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 488
Linting - API #2149
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 our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Linting - API #2149
Conversation
…rbidden characters." This reverts commit 9afa6dd.
…on't call it in the "special" way.
6f92ad7 to
a94dce9
Compare
…for easy API conversion.
…oser to the old behavior.
…) gets stored into every slot of `ValuePerStep` per invocation.
…at` calls and `lint` calls.
…the `ValuePerStep` explicitly. That's enough to bring most of our tests back to life.
… is failing and properly use the `FormatExceptionPolicyStrict`.
|
The next PR adapts all our existing steps and tests to use the This PR shows the API, that API shows the fallout from it. I'm going to merge this one broken, then that one to fix it. Next up is a PR to add a "lint suppression" mechanism, and then it will be ready for the last beta before release! |
Spotless is still primarily a formatter, not a linter. But when formatting fails, it's more flexible to model those failures as lints so that the formatting can continue. For example, issues like
spotlessCheckcould add comments and suggested fix to GitHub PR #655are difficult to resolve with our current model, because the only channel we have to communicate with the user is "this is the formatted content". Now we have two channels: "this is the formatted content" and "these are the problems we had".
At this point, the purpose of these lints is just to do formatting better. They are an implementation detail. If people start submitting PRs for more linters, perhaps it will turn into something more. Who knows!