Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for docs-eslint canceled.
|
fixes #18845
| "**/test.js", | ||
| ".vscode" | ||
| ".vscode", | ||
| "**/*.ts" |
|
Looks like the webpack plugin is using an older version of |
|
I can confirm the |
|
Yes, I think that's all it would take to make both integration tests pass. I'll give it a shot. |
|
Okay, I fixed the incorrect type and we now have three integration tests with other projects. |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| interface Formatter { | ||
| format(results: LintResult[], data?: LintResultData): string | Promise<string>; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The second argument of LoadedFormatter#format() is just an object with an optional maxWarningsExceeded property:
eslint/docs/src/integrate/nodejs-api.md
Lines 469 to 470 in 6e79ac7
The cwd and rulesMeta properties are passed directly to the underlying formatter function:
Lines 1245 to 1255 in 9bde90c
Since that type has been broken for so long and the integration tests are passing now, we can merge this change as it is, and I will try to sort up things in a follow-up PR.
|
|
||
| sourceCode.getAllComments(); | ||
|
|
||
| sourceCode.getJSDocComment(AST); // $ExpectType Comment | null |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
$ExpectType annotations are not working any more. We should also fix this in a follow-up.
fasttime
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, thanks! I'm going to merge this PR now so that it gets included in the ESLint v9.10.0 release.
|
Per 2024-09-05 TSC meeting, this was released early and we will await feedback from users to make sure it is working as expected. @nzakas added some integration tests for the types. |
|
thank you for doing this! |
Prerequisites checklist
What is the purpose of this pull request? (put an "X" next to an item)
[ ] Documentation update
[ ] Bug fix (template)
[ ] New rule (template)
[ ] Changes an existing rule (template)
[ ] Add autofix to a rule
[ ] Add a CLI option
[x] Add something to the core
[ ] Other, please explain:
What changes did you make? (Give an overview)
Added the type definitions from
@types/eslintto the project:lib/typestests/lib/typestest:typesscript to run type checking testsnpm run test:typesto CI to be run on each PRtypesentries topackage.jsonFor simplicity, I did not enable type checking for the whole repo, just for the type tests.
This is intended to be a base for us to build off of. We can look to make improvements in future PRs.
fixes #18845
Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?
The types are copied over as-is without modification (aside from including the license). We don't need to review their contents right now.
Does the testing setup make sense?