Feature Request: make --exclude a synonym of --ignore

[daverayment]

The tool uses --include to include files and folders for processing. The antonym of --include is --exclude, but that is not recognised. The following is output instead:

error: unknown option '--exclude'
(Did you mean --include?)

This is obviously pretty funny, but nevertheless it would be beginner-friendly to have --exclude as a synonym for --ignore.

If there is a reason why this shouldn't be done, then please change the error message to suggest --ignore instead of --include.

[yamadashy]

Hi, @daverayment !
Thank you for your report!

I see the issue now, which I hadn’t noticed.

The cause is the behavior of the Commander library we’re using internally, which tries to suggest similar options when an unknown option is entered.

I’ll consider how to address this. Most likely we’ll focus on correcting the suggestion mechanism to provide more appropriate alternatives.

[pranshugupta01]

Hey @yamadashy , this project is really good! I'd love to contribute — can I work on this issue?

[pranshugupta01]

I've identified several issues with the CLI's file exclusion functionality:

1. Pattern matching problems:

   • Basic patterns like --ignore "*.ts" don't work as expected
   • Only specific patterns like --ignore "**/*.ts" actually exclude files
   • This inconsistency makes the tool unintuitive for users

2. Commander.js suggestion limitations:

   • Commander only suggests string-similar options (edit distance based)
   • No semantic understanding of command meanings
   • Users typing --reject or --omit won't get suggestions for --ignore/--exclude
   • The current suggestion system fails users with different mental models

[yamadashy]

Hi, @pranshugupta01 !
Thanks a lot!

Regarding point 2, I'd love for you to take that on — assigning you now.

As for point 1, it’s a bit out of scope for the current issue, so it would be super helpful if you could open a separate issue for that.

[pranshugupta01]

@yamadashy Thanks for the assigning! Before proceeding, I'd like to clarify:

1. For the CLI options - do you prefer to keep both --ignore and --exclude as valid arguments, or would you rather standardize on just one (e.g., only --exclude)? I can implement either approach based on your preference for the project's direction.

2. Regarding the semantic understanding implementation - the approach I'm thinking of is mapping-based (mapping semantic alternatives to official commands). Are there any other approaches you'd prefer?

I've already opened a separate issue for the pattern matching problems as requested. #450

[yamadashy]

@pranshugupta01
Thanks so much! I appreciate it.

Here are my thoughts:

1. Currently, we only support --ignore, so I’d prefer to keep it that way for now and standardize on --ignore only. I’d like to hold off on supporting both --ignore and --exclude until we get more feedback. I went with ignore since tools like ESLint and Biome use that terminology in their configs.

2. Yes, your idea sounds great — something like mapping exclude / reject / omit to ignore and suggesting it accordingly. I also think that’s a simple and effective approach.