chore(linter): Add more test cases to the no-with rule.

[connorshea]

Only one test case is a bit... slim.

[charliecreates]

Test coverage improved substantially for non-violations, but the violation coverage remains thin: only one with-statement variant is asserted. Adding a few representative failing cases would better protect against regressions in parsing/AST matching across formatting and nesting patterns.

Summary of changes

What changed

• Expanded the no-with rule test coverage in crates/oxc_linter/src/rules/eslint/no_with.rs by replacing a single passing fixture ("foo.bar()") with a broader pass suite.
• Added multiple non-with-statement scenarios that include the token with in:
  • comments (/* ... */, // ...)
  • identifiers/properties (obj.with, { with: 1 }, ['with'], destructuring { with: w })
  • class methods (with() {})
  • string/template literals ('with in string', `with in template`)
• Left the failing fixture as a single canonical with(foo) { bar() } case.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR enhances test coverage for the no-with ESLint rule by adding 11 new test cases to the existing single test case. The new tests comprehensively verify that the rule correctly allows the keyword "with" in contexts where it's not used as a statement (comments, strings, property names, method names, destructuring).

Key Changes:

• Expanded the pass test vector from 1 to 12 test cases
• Added edge cases covering comments, strings, template literals, property access, methods, computed properties, and destructuring

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #16791 will not alter performance

_{Comparing add-more-tests-for-no-with (d2850a9) with main (0d0d606)}

Summary

✅ 4 untouched
⏩ 41 skipped¹

Footnotes

1. 41 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

[connorshea]

Merge activity

• Dec 13, 9:47 AM UTC: The merge label '0-merge' was detected. This PR will be added to the Graphite merge queue once it meets the requirements.
• Dec 13, 9:47 AM UTC: connorshea added this pull request to the Graphite merge queue.
• Dec 13, 9:52 AM UTC: Merged by the Graphite merge queue.