Add require-number-to-fixed-digits-argument rule

[fisker]

Fixes #1245

[bmish]

Some rule names in this plugin could use the common require- rule name prefix. I.e. require-number-to-fixed-digit-argument or require-array-join-separator.

[fisker]

I thought about it and checked core rules and other plugins, but seems require- not very common, but I'm fine to add require-. Let's see what @sindresorhus think.

[bmish]

I try to name almost all my lint rules with the following prefixes to make it clear what they are actually doing:

• require-
• no-
• prefer-

[sindresorhus]

We should mention the default here too, like #1294

[sindresorhus]

I agree. I don't think it's worth renaming existing rules, but we should try to follow that in the future.

[sindresorhus]

require-number-to-fixed-digit-argument

👍

[sindresorhus]

require-array-join-separator

We could do this one too, since it's not released yet.

[bmish]

require-array-join-separator

We could do this one too, since it's not released yet.

Rename PR: #1295

[sindresorhus]

I try to name almost all my lint rules with the following prefixes to make it clear what they are actually doing:

Feel free to open a new issue with your suggestions on what rules should be renamed and we can consider it.

[fisker]

I forgot another reason I didn't add require- at first place, if we want to do more in this rule, eg: check digits type, check it's 0-100 then the rule name won't fit. Same concern for require-array-join-seperator.

[bmish]

I forgot another reason I didn't add require- at first place, if we want to do more in this rule, eg: check digits type, check it's 0-100 then the rule name won't fit. Same concern for require-array-join-seperator.

@fisker makes sense, I agree that if there's any chance we would want to generalize what the rule does, then your original name would be better. Feel free to revert if that's the case. However, in the past, I've also named rules require-valid-foo-argument in order to cover various possible checks that we could perform on that argument.

[fisker]

Another example in core rules. The radix rule added check that number need to be integer 2-36, eslint/eslint#12608, the rule name didn't block that change. It even didn't mention parserInt

[fisker]

require-valid-foo-argument

👍 , but for this rule, require-valid-number-to-fixed-digits-argument seems way too long

[sindresorhus]

npm run generate-rules-table && git diff --exit-code is failing.

[fisker]

I'll fix, what's your opinion about #1288 (comment)

[sindresorhus]

I forgot another reason I didn't add require- at first place, if we want to do more in this rule, eg: check digits type, check it's 0-100 then the rule name won't fit. Same concern for require-array-join-seperator.

I think in general we should try to think upfront before adding a rule whether we're likely to add more stuff to it in the future, if not, I think it's fine to use a specific name with require-*.

eg: check digits type

We can still do this even when it's named require-number-to-fixed-digits-argument.