feat: adds 'ancestor' matcher

[sverweij]

Description

• adds an ancestor matcher

Motivation and Context

It's probably possible to do this with regular expressions and group matching, but so far I haven't found a simple way to do that.

How Has This Been Tested?

• green ci
• additional automated integration tests
• additional automated unit tests
• self-run (added a no-ancestors rule to our own .dependency-cruiser.mjs)

Screenshots

You can now do things like this:

// in the `forbidden` section of a dependency-cruiser config:
{
  name: "no-ancestor",
  comment: "don't allow importing from folders above the current one",
  severity: "error",
  from: {},
  to: { "ancestor": true }
}

Which, when run as part of a validation, would yield errors on every dependency that goes folders up in stead of down:

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Documentation only change
• Refactor (non-breaking change which fixes an issue without changing functionality)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist

• 📖

  • My change doesn't require a documentation update, or ...
  • it does and I have updated it

• ⚖️

  • The contribution will be subject to The MIT license, and I'm OK with that.
  • The contribution is my own original work.
  • I am ok with the stuff in CONTRIBUTING.md.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 13 out of 14 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 14 out of 15 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

[1000i100]

Isn't it ready to merge ?

[sverweij]

Isn't it ready to merge ?

It is. I have doubts about the feature though. It does address an immediate ask, but is it sufficiently flexible for slightly more advanced (but just as valid in their use cases) rules regarding parent-child (e.g. relative paths #330) )?

I usually need an afternoon of quiet time to think this through, but in the past year such afternoons weren't possible. Another option is to just yolo-merge it, and live with the consequences of supporting it ...

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[sverweij]

Yolo & learn