Skip to content

feat: support static analyzer with version 260.31.0#68

Closed
haifeng-li-at-salesforce wants to merge 7 commits intomainfrom
updateKomaci
Closed

feat: support static analyzer with version 260.31.0#68
haifeng-li-at-salesforce wants to merge 7 commits intomainfrom
updateKomaci

Conversation

@haifeng-li-at-salesforce
Copy link
Contributor

Title

feat: support static analyzer with version 260.31.0

Summary

  • Upgrade plugin to work with @komaci/static-analyzer v260.31.0.
  • Improve docs with a flat-config CommonJS example for ESLint 9.
  • Adjust tests/fixtures to align with analyzer behavior changes and rule expectations.

What issues does this PR fix or reference?

W-17577587

Motivation and Context

  • Keeps the plugin current with the latest static analyzer to ensure accurate graph analysis and compatibility with modern LWC toolchains.

Changes

  • package.json:
    • Bump version to 1.1.0.
    • Upgrade @komaci/static-analyzer to ^260.31.0.
  • README.md:
    • Add eslint.config.js example showing how to extend the plugin in ESLint 9 flat config.
    • Minor formatting improvements.
  • tests/fixtures:
    • test/lib/rules/no-expression-contains-module-level-variable-ref.js: add a @wire field in sample to reflect analyzer behavior.
    • test/lib/rules/no-getter-contains-more-than-return-statement.js: switch from wired function to a wired property (record1) to avoid unintended rule violations.
    • test/lib/rules/artifacts-combined-files/helper.js: pass reportUnusedDisableDirectives: false to stabilize test output with ESLint 9.
    • test/lib/rules/artifacts-combined-files/fileUpload/test.js: rephrase comments and annotations to match updated rule expectations.
  • yarn.lock: updated due to dependency changes.

Breaking Changes

  • None expected. The plugin runtime API is unchanged. Node >=20 requirement remains as before.

@khawkins
Copy link
Contributor

khawkins commented Nov 4, 2025

I'm not sure we necessarily want to run this against main. 260 won't be finalized in roll-out until next year, and technically we shouldn't be pulling in 260-specific dependencies until they're available to everyone. We may want to create a separate feature branch for this work, in the meantime.

Copy link
Contributor

@ben-zhang-at-salesforce ben-zhang-at-salesforce left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looks good

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.

3 participants