feat(eslint-config): enable linting with type information#1098
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: be4c434 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1098 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 79.50% 79.50%
=======================================
Files 77 77
Lines 2279 2279
Branches 577 577
=======================================
Hits 1812 1812
Misses 391 391
Partials 76 76
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
| languageOptions: { | ||
| parserOptions: { | ||
| projectService: true, | ||
| tsconfigRootDir: import.meta.dirname, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This tells the typescript-eslint parser where to find the root tsconfig.json, and to use project references
| linterOptions: { | ||
| reportUnusedDisableDirectives: 'error', | ||
| reportUnusedInlineConfigs: 'error', | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Additional linter options
reportUnusedDisableDirectives defaults to 'warn' and reportUnusedInlineConfigs defaults to 'off'
| rules: { | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/array-type': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/await-thenable': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/consistent-indexed-object-style': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/consistent-type-definitions': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/dot-notation': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-base-to-string': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-confusing-void-expression': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-deprecated': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-duplicate-type-constituents': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-dynamic-delete': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-floating-promises': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-invalid-void-type': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-misused-promises': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-non-null-assertion': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-redundant-type-constituents': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unnecessary-boolean-literal-compare': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unnecessary-condition': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unnecessary-template-expression': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unnecessary-type-arguments': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unnecessary-type-assertion': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unnecessary-type-parameters': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-argument': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-assignment': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-call': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-enum-comparison': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-member-access': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-return': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/no-useless-constructor': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/non-nullable-type-assertion-style': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/only-throw-error': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/prefer-function-type': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/prefer-includes': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/prefer-nullish-coalescing': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/prefer-optional-chain': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/prefer-regexp-exec': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/prefer-return-this-type': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/require-await': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/restrict-plus-operands': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/restrict-template-expressions': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/unbound-method': 'off', | ||
| '@typescript-eslint/unified-signatures': 'off', | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've initially disabled all the new rules to keep this PR small
I'd be happy to revisit each rule individually and decide if it's worth enabling or not. If a new rule is problematic, it can always be disabled in the shared eslint config
My personal preference is to have less configuration, and rely on tooling to make these decisions for me. But I understand that doesn't fit with how everyone works 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've initially disabled all the new rules to keep this PR small
I like this approach. Fixing lint errors is troublesome, and the diffs will be huge. We don't have to do it.
| ...tseslint.configs.strictTypeChecked, | ||
| ...tseslint.configs.stylisticTypeChecked, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's a few shared configs to choose from.
Their suggestion is to enabling recommended-type-checked and stylistic-type-checked to start with. Then replacing recommended-type-checked with strict-type-checked if you're comfortable working with TypeScript.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Includes bun_test files in the project
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Includes project configuration files
yusukebe
force-pushed
the
feature/typescript-eslint-type-checked
branch
from
50e796c to
eb62c87
Compare
…eslint-type-checked
yusukebe
changed the title
| @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
| '@hono/eslint-config': major | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. This change includes breaking change, so this is a major version up.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Feel free to ping me if you need help upgrading other projects that use @hono/eslint-config
yusukebe
changed the title
|
Looks good! For this PR, let's just update |
3 participants
Updates the
@hono/eslint-configto includetypescript-eslintpresets for linting with type information