feat: Add bulk suppressions feature for Node.js API #133
Conversation
|
Specific code examples for |
mdjermanovic
added
the
Initial Commenting
| used. Be sure to define any new terms in this section. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| This proposal integrates the existing bulk suppression functionality into the `ESLint` and `LegacyESLint` Node.js API classes by leveraging the internal `SuppressionsService`. A new `suppressionsLocation` option is introduced in the constructors. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since ESLint CLI uses ESLint API, and part of the bulk suppressions functionality will now be implemented directly in the API, will there be any changes to the ESLint CLI code (https://github.com/eslint/eslint/blob/main/lib/cli.js)? For example, perhaps removing some code that is now implemented in the API.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the CLI uses the API, so on the CLI side need to remove the calls of SuppressionsService.
I forgot to write it.
| Currently, the bulk suppression feature introduced in ESLint 9.24.0 is only available via the CLI. | ||
| This leads to inconsistencies when ESLint is used programmatically via its Node.js API, such as in IDE integrations. | ||
|
|
||
| This leads to inconsistencies when ESLint is used programmatically. Violations suppressed using `eslint-suppressions.json` (especially when using a custom location via the CLI) might not be recognized when using the Node.js API, leading to incorrect error reporting in environments like IDEs. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suppose someone has a task to fix previously suppressed violations. How will they do this, since the violations no longer appear in their IDE?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The motivation for using bulk suppression may be “I want to ignore existing errors and give priority to activating new errors”.
With that assumption, existing errors that should be ignored should not be shown in the IDE either.
To work on reducing the number of ignored errors, we can start by check the suppressed errors in eslint-suppressions.json.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mdjermanovic I think this is the same use case as when running on the CLI. Because the CLI automatically picks up the eslint-suppressions.json file, it's necessary to edit, move, or delete the file if your task is to clean up suppressed violations.
|
@sushichan044 please take a moment to sign the CLA (see first comment). |
| Currently, the bulk suppression feature introduced in ESLint 9.24.0 is only available via the CLI. | ||
| This leads to inconsistencies when ESLint is used programmatically via its Node.js API, such as in IDE integrations. | ||
|
|
||
| This leads to inconsistencies when ESLint is used programmatically. Violations suppressed using `eslint-suppressions.json` (especially when using a custom location via the CLI) might not be recognized when using the Node.js API, leading to incorrect error reporting in environments like IDEs. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mdjermanovic I think this is the same use case as when running on the CLI. Because the CLI automatically picks up the eslint-suppressions.json file, it's necessary to edit, move, or delete the file if your task is to clean up suppressed violations.
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| - Specific implementation examples for the `LegacyESLint` class. | ||
| - Should functionality equivalent to CLI flags like `--suppress-all` or `--suppress-rule` be supported via separate API methods in the future? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think so. I think the main use case is people will create and manage a suppressions file using the CLI. The IDE use case is more an extension of that rather than a replacement.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@nzakas
I was relieved because I had the same opinion.
It was an open question to confirm if our understanding was aligned.
Given this direction, I believe it would be better to slightly modify the RFC's title and content to focus on the scope of considering bulk suppressions when running Lint via the Node.js API.
The reason is that with the current content, it might take time for future discussions referencing this RFC to understand that handling the suppression content itself is out of scope.
How do you think?
Co-authored-by: Nicholas C. Zakas <[email protected]>
Summary
This RFC proposes extending the bulk suppressions feature, introduced in ESLint 9.24.0 for CLI usage, to be available through the Node.js API via the
ESLintandLegacyESLintclasses.Related Issues