💅 Object.assign on Accumulators Shouldn't Be Allowed

[mssngr]

Environment information

I am using Biome strictly in the IDE, so this n/a for me.

Rule name

no-accumulating-spread

Playground link

https://biomejs.dev/playground/?code=YwBvAG4AcwB0ACAAYQByAHIAYQB5AE8AZgBPAGIAagBzACAAPQAgAFsAewAKACAAIABoAGUAbABsAG8AOgAgACcAdwBvAHIAbABkACEAJwAKAH0AXQAKAAoAYQByAHIAYQB5AE8AZgBPAGIAagBzAC4AcgBlAGQAdQBjAGUAKAAoAGEAYwBjAHUAbQAsACAAbwBiAGoAKQAgAD0APgAgAE8AYgBqAGUAYwB0AC4AYQBzAHMAaQBnAG4AKABhAGMAYwB1AG0ALAAgAG8AYgBqACkALAAgAHsAfQApAA%3D%3D

Expected result

The No Accumulating Spread rule prevents the O(n^2) problem by not allowing the use of object spreader syntax on accumulators. However, object spreader syntax is just syntactical sugar for Object.assign. And no error is shown for utilizing Object.assign on an accumulator, even though it faces the same O(n^2) problem.

Code of Conduct

• I agree to follow Biome's Code of Conduct

[emilyinure]

Can I take this one?

[emilyinure]

Is there a standardized way to pull the string value out of a JsIdentifierExpression aside from using .to_string?