feat: Reporting unused inline configs

designs/2024-report-unused-inline-configs/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,254 @@
+- Repo: eslint/eslint
+- Start Date: 2024-07-08
+- RFC PR: https://github.com/eslint/rfcs/pull/121
+- Authors: [Josh Goldberg](https://github.com/JoshuaKGoldberg)
+
+# Reporting unused inline configs
+
+## Summary
+
+Add an option to report `/* eslint ... */` comments that don't change any settings.
+
+## Motivation
+
+Right now, nothing in ESLint core stops [inline configs (configuration comments)](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/rules#using-configuration-comments) from redundantly repeating the same configuration _option_ and/or _severity_ as the file's existing computed configuration.
+Unused inline configs suffer from the same drawbacks as [unused disable directives](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/rules#report-unused-eslint-disable-comments): they take up space and can be misleading.
+
+For example:
+
+- [Playground of an inline config setting the same severity as the config file](https://eslint.org/play/#eyJ0ZXh0IjoiLyogZXNsaW50IG5vLXVudXNlZC1leHByZXNzaW9uczogXCJlcnJvclwiICovXG5cIuKdjCBkb2VzIG5vdGhpbmc6IGV4aXN0aW5nIHNldmVyaXR5IHZzLiBmaWxlXCJcbiIsIm9wdGlvbnMiOnsicnVsZXMiOnt9LCJsYW5ndWFnZU9wdGlvbnMiOnsiZWNtYVZlcnNpb24iOiJsYXRlc3QiLCJzb3VyY2VUeXBlIjoibW9kdWxlIiwicGFyc2VyT3B0aW9ucyI6eyJlY21hRmVhdHVyZXMiOnt9fX19fQ==)
+- [Playground of an inline config setting the same options as the config file](https://eslint.org/play/#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)
+
+This RFC proposes adding the ability for ESLint to report on those unused inline configs:
+
+- `--report-unused-inline-configs` CLI option
+- `linterOptions.reportUnusedInlineConfigs` configuration file option
+
+```shell
+npx eslint --report-unused-inline-configs error
+```
+
+```js
+{
+  linterOptions: {
+    reportUnusedInlineConfigs: "error",
+  }
+}
+```
+
+These new options would be similar to the existing [`--report-unused-disable-directives(-severity)`](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/command-line-interface#--report-unused-disable-directives) and [`linterOptions.reportUnusedDisableDirectives`](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/configuration-files#reporting-unused-disable-directives) options.
+
+### Examples
+
+The following table uses [`accessor-pairs`](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/rules/accessor-pairs) as an example with inline configs like `/* eslint accessor-pairs: "off" */`.
+It assumes the `accessor-pairs` default options from [feat: add meta.defaultOptions](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/pull/17656) of:
+
+```json
+{
+  "enforceForClassMembers": true,
+  "getWithoutSet": false,
+  "setWithoutGet": true
+}
+```
+
+<table>
+  <thead>
+    <tr>
+      <th>Original Config Setting</th>
+      <th>Inline Config Settings</th>
+      <th>Report?</th>
+    </tr>
+  </thead>
+  <tbody>
+    <tr>
+      <td rowspan="7">
+        <code>"error"</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>2</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>["error", { "enforceForClassMembers": true }]</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>["error", { "getWithoutSet": false }]</code>
+      </td>
+      <td>
+        <code>"off"</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>0</code>
+      </td>
+      <td>No</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td>
+        <code>"warn"</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>1</code>
+      </td>
+      <td>No</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td>
+        <code>"error"</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>2</code>
+      </td>
+      <td><strong>Yes</strong></td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td>
+        <code>["error", { "enforceForClassMembers": false }]</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>[2, { "enforceForClassMembers": false }]</code>
+      </td>
+      <td>No</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td>
+        <code>["error", { "getWithoutSet": true }]</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>[2, { "getWithoutSet": true }]</code>
+      </td>
+      <td>No</td>
+    </tr>
+    <tr>
+      <td>
+        <code>["error", { "enforceForClassMembers": true }]</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>[2, { "enforceForClassMembers": true }]</code>
+      </td>
+      <td><strong>Yes</strong></td>
+    </tr>
+      <td>
+        <code>["error", { "getWithoutSet": false }]</code>
+        <br />
+        <code>[2, { "getWithoutSet": false }]</code>
+      </td>
+      <td><strong>Yes</strong></td>
+    </tr>
+  </tbody>
+</table>
+
+## Detailed Design
+
+Additional logic can be added to the existing code points in `Linter` that validate inline config options: [`_verifyWithFlatConfigArrayAndWithoutProcessors`](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/blob/7c78ad9d9f896354d557f24e2d37710cf79a27bf/lib/linter/linter.js#L1636).
+For a rough code reference, see [`poc: reporting unused inline configs`](https://github.com/JoshuaKGoldberg/eslint/commit/e14e404ed93e6238bdee817923a449f5215eecd8).
+
+### Computing Option Differences
+
+Each inline config comment will be compared against the existing configuration value(s) it attempts to override:
+
+- If the config comment only specifies a severity, then only the severity will be checked for redundancy
+  - The new logic will normalize options: `"off"` will be considered equivalent to `0`
+- If the config comment also specifies rule options, they will be compared for deep equality to the existing rule options
+
+This RFC should wait to begin work until after [feat: add meta.defaultOptions](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/pull/17656) is merged into ESLint.
+That way, a rule's `meta.defaultOptions` can be factored into computing whether an inline config's rule options differ from the previously configured options.
+
+### Default Values
+
+This RFC proposes a two-step approach to introducing unused inline config reporting:
+
+1. In the current major version upon introduction, don't enable unused inline config reporting by default
+2. In the next major version, enable unused inline config reporting by default
+
+Note that the default value in the next major version should be the same as reporting unused disable directives.
+See [Change Request: error by default for unused disable directives](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18665) for an issue on changing that from `"warn"` to `"error"`.
+
+## Documentation
+
+The new settings will be documented similarly to reporting unused disable directives:
+
+- [Configuration Files](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/configuration-files):
+  - List item for `reportUnusedInlineConfig` under _[Configuration Objects](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/configuration-files#configuration-objects)_ > `linterOptions`
+  - Sub-heading alongside _[Reporting Unused Disable Directives](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/configuration-files#reporting-unused-disable-directives)_
+- [Configure Rules](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/rules):
+  - Sub-heading alongside _[Report unused eslint-disable comments](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/rules#report-unused-eslint-disable-comments)_
+- [Command Line Interface Reference](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/command-line-interface):
+  - List item under the _[Options](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/command-line-interface#options)_ code block, under `Inline Configuration comments:`
+  - Corresponding sub-headings under _[Inline Configuration Comments](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/command-line-interface#inline-configuration-comments)_
+
+## Drawbacks
+
+Any added options come with an added tax on project maintenance and user comprehension.
+This RFC believes the flagging of unused inline configs is worth that tax.
+
+## Backwards Compatibility Analysis
+
+The proposed two-step approach introduces the options in a fully backwards-compatible way.
+No new warnings or errors will be reported in the current major version without the user explicitly opting into them.
+
+## Out of Scope
+
+### Language-Specific Changes
+
+This proposed design does intentionally not involve any language-specific code changes.
+How a specific language computes its configuration comments is irrelevant to this proposed feature.
+
+### Legacy ("eslintrc") Configs
+
+ESLint v9 is released and flat configs are the default for users.
+The legacy config system will likely be removed in the next major version of ESLint.
+This RFC prefers to avoid the added maintenance cost of supporting the legacy config system.
+
+If this RFC's new CLI flag or config file entry are enabled with using a legacy config, ESLint should throw an error.
+
+## Alternatives
+
+### Checking Config File Values
+
+[eslint/eslint#15476 Change Request: report unnecessary config overrides](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/15476) previously suggested also checking config files (`eslint.config.*`).
+Doing so could be beneficial to flag values that become unnecessary in config files over time.
+However, because flat config purely involves spreading objects, there's no way to know what objects originate from shared configs or shared packages.
+
+[c339a5](https://github.com/eslint/rfcs/pull/121/commits/c339a59bfaec0c48817a012c2f5e92a242a1b1e6) is a reference commit of how this RFC might look with that support added in.
+
+An alternative could have been to require users provide metadata along with their shared configs, and/or wrap them in some function provided by ESLint.
+That could be a future requirement opted into ESLint.
+It's too late now to add that to the flat config system, and as such is out of scope for this RFC.
+
+### Separate CLI Option
+
+Unlike the changes discussed in [Change Request: Enable reportUnusedDisableDirectives config option by default](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/15466) -> [feat!: flexible config + default reporting of unused disable directives](https://github.com/eslint/rfcs/pull/100), reporting unused inline configs does not have legacy behavior to keep to.
+The existing `--report-unused-disable-directives` (enabling) and `--report-unused-disable-directives-severity` (severity) options were kept separate for backwards compatibility.
+
+Adding a sole `--report-unused-inline-configs` CLI option presents a discrepency between the two sets of options.
+An alternative could be to instead add `--report-unused-inline-configs` and `--report-unused-inline-configs-severity` options for consistency's sake.
+
+This RFC's opinion is that the consistency of adding two new options is not worth the excess options logic.
+It would instead be preferable to, in a future ESLint major version, deprecate `--report-unused-disable-directives-severity` and merge its logic setting into `--report-unused-disable-directives`.
+
+### Superset Behavior: Unused Disable Directive Reporting
+
+Disable directives can be thought as a subset of inline configs in general.
+Reporting on unused disable directives could be thought of as a subset of reporting on unused inline configs.
+
+An additional direction this RFC could propose would be to have the new unused inline config reporting act as a superset of unused disable directive reporting.
+
+However:
+
+- Deprecating `reportUnusedDisableDirectives` would be a distruptive breaking change
+- This RFC proposes enabling `reportUnusedInlineConfigs` by default in a subsequent major version anyway: most users will not be manually configuring it
+
+## Help Needed
+
+I would like to implement this RFC.
+
+## Frequently Asked Questions
+
+### Why so many references to reporting unused disable directives?
+
+This RFC's proposed behavior is similar on the surface to the existing behavior around reporting unused disable directives.
+It's beneficial for users to have similar behaviors between similar options.
+
+### Will inline configs be compared to previous inline configs in the same file?
+
+As of [Change Request: Disallow multiple configuration comments for the same rule](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18132) -> [feat!: disallow multiple configuration comments for same rule](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/pull/18157), the same rule cannot be configured by an inline config more than once per file.
+
+## Related Discussions
+
+- <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18230>: the issue triggering this RFC
+  - <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/15476>: previous issue suggesting reporting unnecessary config overrides
+- <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/15466>: previous issue for enabling `reportUnusedDisableDirectives` config option by default
+  - <https://github.com/eslint/rfcs/pull/100>: the RFC discussion flexible config + default reporting of unused disable directives
+  - <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/pull/17212>: the PR implementing custom severity when reporting unused disable directives
+- <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18665>: issue suggesting erroring by default for unused disable directives
+- <https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/18666>: issue suggesting merging `--report-unused-disable-directives-severity` into `--report-unused-disable-directives`