Skip to content

Fix linter setup #49

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

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
May 4, 2021
Merged

Fix linter setup #49

merged 6 commits into from
May 4, 2021

Conversation

zcei
Copy link
Contributor

@zcei zcei commented May 4, 2021

Hej folks,

while I wanted to work on this library for a proposed fix, I realized that the current linter setup was not actually linting TypeScript files. (I've screwed up this globbing vs. --ext a couple times myself 😅 )

To make it easier to track the changes I've split up the work into multiple easy-to-review commits, and would recommend to not review chore: ESLint autofixes (0a5d8bd) as it exclusively enforces linting rules you've set up previously and they are tested by the ESLint autofix implementation.

The two biggest changes are replacing a single forEach with a for-of loop to fix no-unused-expressions and introducing a new innerComplexities variables to fix no-param-reassign.

@ivome ivome merged commit 9db9914 into slicknode:master May 4, 2021
@zcei zcei deleted the fix/linter-setup branch May 4, 2021 17:38
@ivome
Copy link
Collaborator

ivome commented May 4, 2021

Thanks for fixing the linter setup @zcei . While I was at it, I also set up prettier via #51 for automatic code formatting and got rid of all the custom linting rules in favor of the standard recommended ones to make it easier to contribute.

@zcei
Copy link
Contributor Author

zcei commented May 4, 2021

@ivome even better - I was considering introducing it as well, but decided against it to not bloat the changeset any further. Love to see it!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants