Fix: Exclude eol-last from output (fixes #48) #49
Conversation
| @@ -12,6 +12,9 @@ var assign = require("object-assign"); | |||
| var remark = require("remark"); | |||
|
|
|||
| var SUPPORTED_SYNTAXES = ["js", "javascript", "node", "jsx"]; | |||
| var UNSATISFIABLE_RULES = [ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
May wanna make this configurable at a future version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a good point. I don't believe we have a way to support plugin-specific configuration. Is that correct, @ilyavolodin? If other core rules comes up, we can add them to this list. Hopefully by the time we get requests to exclude rules in third-party plugins, we have glob configs that will allow users to exclude those rules on their own.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As in allow rules inside plugins to specify if they should apply to markdown or not? Or configure all of the rules inside plugin in a specific way? If former - then no.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A way to apply config to a postprocess step in a plugin. Something like:
{
"pluginConfig": {
"markdown": {
"unsatisfiableRules": ["eol-last", "react/no-multi-comp"]
}
}
}I checked on the plugin documentation and didn't see anything like that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm... You could use settings. Although I'm having trouble finding it in the documentation for some reason.
Ah, found it (yay, search!), it's strange that it's not mentioned in working with plugins, but it is mentioned in the configuring eslint: http://eslint.org/docs/user-guide/configuring#adding-shared-settings
There was a problem hiding this comment.
settings only gets passed to rules though. If necessary, we could:
- Modify core to pass
settingsto processors. - Hack it in by offering a
markdown/unsatisfiable-rulesmeta-rule that would remember its config. - Shave an entire herd of yacks and get glob config in core.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I vote for shaving yacks! You get nice sweaters that way too!
|
LGTM Only concern is a bout tests. It's not clear to me from the PR that this new feature is properly covered by tests. |
|
@BYK Previously, all of the plugin tests would blow up if the exclusion wasn't working because I enabled |
|
@btmills - looks great, prefrect! |
/cc @BYK for review