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.
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
Support Optional Chaining in Rules #1051
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This is issue about enhancing rules by adding support for the new AST.If you have a bug, please search to see if an issue exists already, or file a new issue if it doesn't |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Looking into it - |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
We are a community run project, meaning we rely on community support to get things done outside of critical bugfixes or core infrastructure. Happy to accept a PR if there's something missing that is important to you. |
Spinning off of #1033
Rules that need to have support added for optional chaining.
This list was based on a simple grep for
MemberExpression
andCallExpression
, I haven't validated anything beyond that. There are probably extra rules that could do with support as well that don't checkMemberExpression
andCallExpression
.Rules that require a simple one-line change (i.e. adding a selector):
Rules that require a larger enhancement to support (i.e. new feature in rule):
Extension rules that will be a pain to update (i.e. base extension rewrite):
Broken rules due to ESLint not supporting the new AST nodes:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: