Add require-assertion rule #336
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Turbo87
approved these changes
Aug 28, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- It doesn’t validate that the assertion function called actually exists in the API, would this be a useful addition?
I guess that should probably be implemented in a dedicated rule, if necessary
- Autofix appends
.exists()which I believe to be the assertion implied by a standalone call toassert.dom(…), but maybe autofix isn’t even advisable in this case?
yeah, I was wondering the same thing, but I think I'm okay with using exists() as the default in this case.
|
looks like prettier is still a bit unhappy about the formatting... 😅 |
backspace
force-pushed
the
require-assertion
branch
from
6265a7d to
3bdfa90
Compare
oh yes 😬 I’ve force-pushed the fixes there, thanks! |
|
Anything else needed? 🤞🏻 |
|
sorry, forgot about this |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a possible solution to close #335, I made some editorial choices that I’m not attached to:
eslint-plugin-emberthat started withrequire-, it seemed the best match..exists()which I believe to be the assertion implied by a standalone call toassert.dom(…), but maybe autofix isn’t even advisable in this case?The AST checks I used work for the test cases but I’m not that experienced in this realm so let me know if there are more assertions to add that would correct flaws in the selector or conditional.