when reporting diagnotics for code such as
```ts
let foo = {};
for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
foo = { ...foo, [i]: i };
}
```
we do not currently differentiate the diagnostic message between object/array.
this PR changes this to help the user fix ths issue
when reporting diagnotics for code such as
```ts
let foo = {};
for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
foo = { ...foo, [i]: i };
}
```
we do not currently report **where** the accumulator is defined.
since this is constant for `Array.prototype.reduce`, it is not necessary.
however for loops, it makes sense to add this span to clearly show the user where the accumator is defined.
fixes#5159 and any other named function assigned to a property like:
```js
const foo = {};
foo.bar = function fooBar() {}
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Don Isaac <donald.isaac@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Cameron Clark <cameron.clark@hey.com>
Adds `no-async-endpoint-handlers` rules, which bans async functions used as endpoint handlers in Express applications. These do not get caught by Express' error handler, causing the server to crash with an unhandled process rejection error.
```js
app.use(async (req, res) => {
const foo = await api.getFoo(req.query) // server panics if this function rejects
return res.json(foo)
})
```
I could not find this rule implemented in any ESLint plugin, but this is a problem I see quite often and I'm tired of dealing with it. I've added it to `oxc` for now, but we should consider adding an `express` or `api` plugin in the future.
Follow-on after #5223. We're trying to ignore JSX identifiers, so there's no point walking downwards from `JSXElementName`, as all we'll find is JSX identifiers that we want to ignore.
Follow-on after #5223.
Now that we are getting an `IdentifierReference` with a `reference_id`, we can use that ID for a faster lookup of whether the reference is bound or not.
Follow-on after #5223.
#5223 introduced the line `let span = jsx_el.opening_element.name.span();`. But the span is only needed when creating a diagnostic when the rule fails (cold path). Avoid the work of getting the span for the common case where the rule passes.
VSCode has a couple violations. examples:
```
x oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
,-[src/vs/workbench/services/textMate/common/TMGrammarFactory.ts:65:5]
64 | let injections: string[] = [];
65 | for (let i = 1; i <= scopeParts.length; i++) {
: ^|^
: `-- For this loop
66 | const subScopeName = scopeParts.slice(0, i).join('.');
67 | injections = [...injections, ...(this._injections[subScopeName] || [])];
: ^^^^^^|^^^^^^
: `-- From this spread
68 | }
`----
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.
x oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
,-[src/vs/base/common/actions.ts:205:3]
204 | let out: IAction[] = [];
205 | for (const list of actionLists) {
: ^|^
: `-- For this loop
206 | if (!list.length) {
207 | // skip
208 | } else if (out.length) {
209 | out = [...out, new Separator(), ...list];
: ^^^|^^
: `-- From this spread
210 | } else {
`----
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.
help: It looks like you're spreading an `Array`. Consider using the `Array.push` or `Array.concat` methods to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.
x oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
,-[src/vs/workbench/contrib/extensions/browser/extensionsActions.ts:302:3]
301 | let actions: IAction[] = [];
302 | for (const visibleActions of actionsGroups) {
: ^|^
: `-- For this loop
303 | if (visibleActions.length) {
304 | actions = [...actions, ...visibleActions, new Separator()];
: ^^^^^|^^^^
: `-- From this spread
305 | }
`----
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.
x oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
,-[src/vs/workbench/contrib/extensions/browser/extensionsActions.ts:1141:3]
1140 | let actions: IAction[] = [];
1141 | for (const menuActions of menuActionGroups) {
: ^|^
: `-- For this loop
1142 | actions = [...actions, ...menuActions, new Separator()];
: ^^^^^|^^^^
: `-- From this spread
1143 | }
`----
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.
x oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
,-[src/vs/workbench/contrib/extensions/browser/extensionsViews.ts:334:4]
333 | let actions: IAction[] = [];
334 | for (const menuActions of groups) {
: ^|^
: `-- For this loop
335 | actions = [...actions, ...menuActions, new Separator()];
: ^^^^^|^^^^
: `-- From this spread
336 | }
`----
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.
```
This pr is for jest/vitest compat and add another jest rule condition
---------
Co-authored-by: Don Isaac <donald.isaac@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Wang Wenzhe <mysteryven@gmail.com>
changes from using `without_parenthesis` to using `get_inner_expression` to ignore type casts, non null assertions ect.
this helps catch more error cases
