tools: replace custom assert.fail lint rule #12287
Conversation
Replace custom lint rule for `assert.fail()` function signature errors with a restricted-syntax rule.
| @@ -110,6 +110,9 @@ rules: | |||
| }, { | |||
| selector: "ThrowStatement > CallExpression[callee.name=/Error$/]", | |||
| message: "Use new keyword when throwing an Error." | |||
| }, { | |||
| selector: "CallExpression[callee.object.name='assert'][callee.property.name='fail'][arguments.length=1]", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a valid use-case for a two argument assert.fail?
Also if assert.fail(null, null, "message") is a valid use-case, we should probably document that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This came out of specific errors in the code base. I'm unaware of anyone ever misusing assert.fail() with two arguments in core, and once you are checking for that, the lint message you have to supply gets a lot trickier.
I don't like ramping up non-standard lint rules to be more strict to catch hypothetical problems because as you make the rules more and more strict, you end up generating false positives. But if we were to do that, I'd say let's do it in a different pull request. This one is replacing a custom rule with identical functionality using built-in ESLint capabilities. I'd rather not alter the functionality at the same time.
assert.fail() is an unfortunate API IMO. As far as I can tell, if you supply a truthy value for the third argument, the first two arguments and the fourth argument are all ignored. (I'm not looking at the code so maybe there's an edge case in there where that's not true. I doubt it, though.) And the first two arguments don't make a lot of sense without the fourth argument.
So....the useful signatures are assert.fail(value, value, falsy, value) or assert.fail(ignored, ignored, message).
It's a mess IMO but this lint rule was designed to catch just the one exceedingly common misuse.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
By the way, PR incoming soon to make the API less confusing. :-D
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the detail, definitely not really related to this PR anyway.
Yeah, I find the idea that you have to have the third argument as falsy to actually use the fourth argument a bit hard to wrap my head around.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
PR to make API less confusing: #12293
| @@ -110,6 +110,9 @@ rules: | |||
| }, { | |||
| selector: "ThrowStatement > CallExpression[callee.name=/Error$/]", | |||
| message: "Use new keyword when throwing an Error." | |||
| }, { | |||
| selector: "CallExpression[callee.object.name='assert'][callee.property.name='fail'][arguments.length=1]", | |||
| message: "assert.fail() message should be third argument" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is really clear if you did assert.fail('message'), but not if you made another mistake (i.e. did assert.fail(false) or something. Maybe something more generic like assert.fail() should take at least three arguments?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This rule came out of fixing a bunch of actual misuse in the code base. In every single case, it was assert.fail(string) so I'm pretty OK with it the way it is. I can't even fathom what someone would mean by assert.fail(false) to be honest.
Replace custom lint rule for `assert.fail()` function signature errors with a restricted-syntax rule. PR-URL: nodejs#12287 Reviewed-By: Teddy Katz <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yuta Hiroto <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
|
Landed in b3f2e3b |
Replace custom lint rule for `assert.fail()` function signature errors with a restricted-syntax rule. PR-URL: #12287 Reviewed-By: Teddy Katz <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yuta Hiroto <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Replace custom lint rule for `assert.fail()` function signature errors with a restricted-syntax rule. PR-URL: #12287 Reviewed-By: Teddy Katz <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yuta Hiroto <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Replace custom lint rule for `assert.fail()` function signature errors with a restricted-syntax rule. PR-URL: #12287 Reviewed-By: Teddy Katz <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Yuta Hiroto <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Replace custom lint rule for
assert.fail()function signature errorswith a restricted-syntax rule.
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passesAffected core subsystem(s)
tools