Rule Change: allow void in array-callback-return for Array.prototype.forEach

[nopeless]

What rule do you want to change?

array-callback-return

What change to do you want to make?

Implement suggestions

How do you think the change should be implemented?

A new option

Example code

// example of a non-void side-effect function
[1,2,3].forEach(n => cls.computeCache(n))

// will suggest the following
// Insert void
[1,2,3].forEach(n => void cls.computeCache(n))
// Wrap in {}
[1,2,3].forEach(n => {cls.computeCache(n)})

What does the rule currently do for this code?

Rightfully marks it as wrong, as return value of forEach's callback is ignored

However, even adding a void in front does not fix the issue, and there are no IDE suggestions

What will the rule do after it's changed?

add a new option allowVoid. It will share the same logic that I have implemented for detecting void and suggesting fixes in #17282

If #17282 passes, then it is logical that this rule has consistent options and behavior.

Participation

• I am willing to submit a pull request to implement this change.

Additional comments

I think I saw an issue related to forEach and void, but I can't seem to find it for now

[sam3k]

Hey @nopeless, I am not too familiar with this lint rule and I'm trying to repro in the playground but do not see it marking any of the examples you've provided as wrong. Am I missing something? Could you update the playground example?

[nopeless]

repro

@sam3k

Sorry, forgot to mention that this only happens when check foreach is enabled

[mdjermanovic]

Makes sense to me 👍

[nzakas]

I am also in favor. @nopeless do you want to submit a PR for this?

[nopeless]

Would you mind if i do this on the same PR thats currently open right now @nzakas

[nzakas]

@nopeless we need it on a separate pull request so we can evaluate each separately.

[sam3k]

@nopeless will you be able to create a separate PR?

[nopeless]

@nopeless will you be able to create a separate PR?

Yes, but I am planning to do it after #17282 is merged since it would be easier that way

[Tanujkanti4441]

@snitin315 are you working on this currently?

[snitin315]

@Tanujkanti4441 feel free to work on this.

[mdjermanovic]

PR #17564 that implements the new option allowVoid has been merged. The remaining task is to implement suggestions.

[mdjermanovic]

Fixed by #17564 and #17590.