You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: CHANGELOG.md
+3Lines changed: 3 additions & 0 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -27,11 +27,14 @@
27
27
- Fix `@val` shadowing (rewrite using `globalThis`). https://github.com/rescript-lang/rescript/pull/8098
28
28
- Fix `@scope` shadowing (rewrite using `globalThis`). https://github.com/rescript-lang/rescript/pull/8100
29
29
- Formatter: normalize underscore placeholders in pipe expressions to canonical form (e.g., `a->map2(_, fn)` formats to `a->map2(fn)`). https://github.com/rescript-lang/rescript/pull/8033
30
+
- Fix rewatch panic on duplicate module name. https://github.com/rescript-lang/rescript/pull/8102
30
31
31
32
#### :memo: Documentation
32
33
33
34
#### :nail_care: Polish
34
35
36
+
- Formatter: Improve multiline printing of record types and values. https://github.com/rescript-lang/rescript/pull/7993
37
+
35
38
#### :house: Internal
36
39
37
40
- Reanalyze: refactor DCE to pure pipeline architecture for order-independence and incremental update support. https://github.com/rescript-lang/rescript/pull/8043
The ReScript formatter is **opinionated**. Formatting decisions are made by the core team based on our collective judgment and vision for the language. We do not aim to accommodate every stylistic preference or engage in extended debates about formatting choices.
6
+
7
+
The formatter currently has **no configuration settings**, and we aspire to keep it that way. This ensures that ReScript code looks consistent across all projects and teams, eliminating style debates and configuration overhead.
8
+
9
+
## Decision Making
10
+
11
+
-**Core team consensus is final**: When the core team reaches consensus on a formatting decision, that decision stands. There is no requirement for community-wide agreement or extensive discussion.
12
+
13
+
-**Community input is welcome but not binding**: We appreciate suggestions and feedback from the community, but these can be closed without extensive justification if the core team is not aligned with the proposal.
14
+
15
+
-**No endless style discussions**: We are not interested in protracted debates about formatting preferences. The formatter exists to provide consistent, automated formatting—not to serve as a platform for style negotiations.
16
+
17
+
## Prior Decisions
18
+
19
+
The following are examples of formatting decisions the core team has made. This list is not exhaustive, and these decisions do not create binding precedents for future discussions. The core team retains full discretion to make different decisions in similar cases.
20
+
21
+
-**Smart linebreaks for pipe chains**: The formatter preserves user-introduced linebreaks in pipe chains (`->`), allowing users to control multiline formatting. See [forum announcement](https://forum.rescript-lang.org/t/ann-smart-linebreaks-for-pipe-chains/4734).
22
+
23
+
-**Preserve multilineness for records**: The formatter preserves multiline formatting for record types and values when users introduce linebreaks. See [issue #7961](https://github.com/rescript-lang/rescript/issues/7961).
24
+
25
+
**Important**: These examples are provided for reference only. They do not establish rules or precedents that constrain future formatting decisions. The core team may choose different approaches in similar situations based on current consensus.
26
+
27
+
## Guidelines for Contributors
28
+
29
+
### Submitting Formatting Issues
30
+
31
+
- You may open issues to report bugs or propose improvements
32
+
- Understand that proposals may be closed if they don't align with core team vision
33
+
- Avoid reopening closed issues unless there's new technical information
34
+
- Respect that "the core team isn't feeling it" is a valid reason for closure
35
+
36
+
### What We Consider
37
+
38
+
- Technical correctness and consistency
39
+
- Alignment with ReScript's design philosophy
40
+
- Maintainability and simplicity of the formatter implementation
41
+
- Core team consensus
42
+
43
+
### What We Generally Avoid
44
+
45
+
- Style preferences that don't align with our vision
46
+
- Using comparisons to other formatters as the sole justification for changes (while we may align with other formatters on many decisions, we make choices based on our own judgment, not because another formatter does it)
47
+
- Requests that would significantly complicate the formatter implementation
0 commit comments