10000 feat(typescript-estree): remove optionality from AST boolean properties by JoshuaKGoldberg · Pull Request #6274 · typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content

feat(typescript-estree): remove optionality from AST boolean properties #6274

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Feb 24, 2023
Merged

feat(typescript-estree): remove optionality from AST boolean properties #6274

merged 11 commits into from
Feb 24, 2023

Conversation

JoshuaKGoldberg
Copy link
Member
@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg commented Dec 24, 2022 •
edited
Loading

PR Checklist

Overview

Switches ?: boolean properties to : boolean in ast-spec. Updates convert.ts accordingly to always assign those properties even if they're not true.

Does not update snapshots that need manual touchups, pending resolution of whether to use this or #6273.

@nx-cloud
Copy link
nx-cloud bot commented Dec 24, 2022 •
edited
Loading

☁️ Nx Cloud Report

CI is running/has finished running commands for commit 3743f2b. As they complete they will appear below. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this branch

✅ Successfully ran 51 targets

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

@typescript-eslint
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for the PR, @JoshuaKGoldberg!

typescript-eslint is a 100% community driven project, and we are incredibly grateful that you are contributing to that community.

The core maintainers work on this in their personal time, so please understand that it may not be possible for them to review your work immediately.

Thanks again!

🙏 Please, if you or your company is finding typescript-eslint valuable, help us sustain the project by sponsoring it transparently on https://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint.

This was referenced Dec 24, 2022
Closed
Closed
bradzacher
bradzacher approved these changes Feb 1, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member
@bradzacher bradzacher left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

matrix_deletion

This LGTM - generate all the snapshots and we can get this in.
There's too many to review by hand, but the changes themselves are all looking good!

This was referenced Feb 2, 2023
Closed
Merged
@Josh-Cena Josh-Cena mentioned this pull request Feb 17, 2023
Merged
3 tasks
@JoshuaKGoldberg
Copy link
Member Author
JoshuaKGoldberg commented Feb 20, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Some new test failures after merge. I'm going to take a break then look at them... this is a mildly frustrating PR to work with 🙃 ✅

@bradzacher bradzacher linked an issue Feb 22, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
AST standardisation: remove undefined/optional from node properties unless it really makes sense #5020
Closed
@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg added this to the 6.0.0 milestone Feb 23, 2023
@netlify
Copy link
netlify bot commented Feb 23, 2023 •
edited
Loading

✅ Deploy Preview for typescript-eslint ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 3743f2b
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/typescript-eslint/deploys/63f81f90e3558300086ee6b9
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-6274--typescript-eslint.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg marked this pull request as ready for review February 23, 2023 06:54
@codecov
Copy link
codecov bot commented Feb 23, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Merging #6274 (3743f2b) into v6 (cbb8fed) will increase coverage by 0.74%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##               v6    #6274      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   87.06%   87.81%   +0.74%     
==========================================
  Files         365      365              
  Lines       12579    12455     -124     
  Branches     3720     3669      -51     
==========================================
- Hits        10952    10937      -15     
+ Misses       1278     1158     -120     
- Partials      349      360      +11
Flag Coverage Δ
unittest 87.81% <ø> (+0.74%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...-plugin/src/rules/explicit-member-accessibility.ts 96.15% <0.00%> (-1.29%) ⬇️
...ckages/scope-manager/src/referencer/TypeVisitor.ts 97.97% <0.00%> (-1.02%) ⬇️
...ackages/scope-manager/src/referencer/Referencer.ts 95.49% <0.00%> (-0.43%) ⬇️
packages/eslint-plugin/src/rules/indent.ts 92.85% <0.00%> (ø)
...ages/eslint-plugin/src/rules/unified-signatures.ts 92.10% <0.00%> (ø)
.../eslint-plugin/src/rules/no-useless-constructor.ts 94.73% <0.00%> (ø)
...lugin/src/rules/consistent-indexed-object-style.ts 92.06% <0.00%> (ø)
...kages/scope-manager/src/referencer/ClassVisitor.ts 93.44% <0.00%> (+0.70%) ⬆️
packages/typescript-estree/src/convert.ts 31.86% <0.00%> (+3.66%) ⬆️

@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg merged commit df131e2 into typescript-eslint:v6 Feb 24, 2023
@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg deleted the boolean-optional-remove-optional branch February 24, 2023 02:51
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 4, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Reviewers

@bradzacher bradzacher bradzacher approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
6.0.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

AST standardisation: remove undefined/optional from node properties unless it really makes sense
2 participants
@JoshuaKGoldberg @bradzacher
0