refactor(linter): Simplify DefaultRuleConfig usage so we always pass Self to it.#17478
Merged
graphite-app[bot] merged 1 commit intomainfrom Dec 30, 2025
Merged
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
A-linter
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR refactors the linter codebase to use Self instead of explicit type names when passing types to DefaultRuleConfig. This is a purely mechanical change that simplifies the from_configuration implementations across all lint rules.
Key changes:
- Replaced
DefaultRuleConfig<ExplicitTypeName>withDefaultRuleConfig<Self>in allfrom_configurationmethod implementations - Updated the documentation example in
rule.rsto reflect the new pattern
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 149 out of 149 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| crates/oxc_linter/src/rule.rs | Updated documentation example to use DefaultRuleConfig<Self> instead of explicit type name |
| All rule files (140+ files) | Replaced explicit type names with Self in DefaultRuleConfig type parameter across vue, unicorn, typescript, react, promise, oxc, node, jsx_a11y, jsdoc, jest, import, and eslint rule modules |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #17478 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
Footnotes
|
camc314
approved these changes
Dec 30, 2025
camc314
changed the title
Self to it.Self to it.
Contributor
Merge activity
|
…`Self` to it. (#17478) Good ol' find-and-replace :)
graphite-app
bot
force-pushed
the
pass-self-to-default-rule-config
branch
from
505e41e to
3c7ad0a
Compare
bradzacher
approved these changes
Dec 30, 2025
camc314
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 30, 2025
…lt` (#17479) Built on top of #17478. Based on the changes I experimented with in #17199, and the suggestion given by camc in that PR. AI Disclosure: This was done almost entirely via find+replace and manual updates to fix individual rules. I did use AI for the change in 0abc981 since I had trouble figuring out a solution for that. It may be easier to review this by going through it commit-by-commit. Ran ecosystem CI on this branch and it looks like it works fine, no new regressions https://github.com/oxc-project/oxc-ecosystem-ci/actions/runs/20590908980 --------- Co-authored-by: Cameron Clark <[email protected]>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Good ol' find-and-replace :)