feat: support explicit resource management in core rules #19828
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for docs-eslint canceled.
|
I think yes, but we don't need to update/fix all rules in one PR. For manageability reasons, it might be good to limit the scope of this PR to the rules already included in it, and discuss the rest on the original issue. |
989b7c3 to
6913dd3
Compare
|
Rebased on main to use the updated espree parser. So this is ready to be reviewed. |
I think we should at least add examples with |
lib/rules/no-unused-vars.js
Outdated
|
|
||
| return ( | ||
| definition?.type === "Variable" && | ||
| definition.parent.type === "VariableDeclaration" && |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| definition.parent.type === "VariableDeclaration" && |
I think this is redundant since the parent has to be VariableDeclaration when the definition is of Variable type.
https://eslint.org/docs/latest/extend/scope-manager-interface#parent
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unfortunately svelte-eslint-parser also creates a variable of type Variable but with a node.parent of SvelteConstTag for
{@const value = 0}There was a problem hiding this comment.
But this syntax is not for JavaScript files and out of scope for this rule. If someone is using svelte-eslint-parser they should use svelte specific rules.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it depends on what the current behavior is. If the rule works with the Svelte parser now, it should continue to do so.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In this case it is unnecessary so I removed it, as we only check the parents kind property which would be undefined in the case of the svelte const tag.
I probably added it without proper thought as a safety as the svelte case surprised in the past.
|
Regarding the check of |
Prerequisites checklist
What is the purpose of this pull request? (put an "X" next to an item)
[ ] Documentation update
[ ] Bug fix (template)
[ ] New rule (template)
[ ] Changes an existing rule (template)
[ ] Add autofix to a rule
[ ] Add a CLI option
[ ] Add something to the core
[x] Other, please explain: Support new syntax
What changes did you make? (Give an overview)
This PR adds preliminary support for the explicit resource management proposal which will likely be included in ES2026 (refs #19792).
Most of the changes are additional tests for existing rules except the following behavior changes:
curly: allows using/await using as only statement as otherwise parser error (same as forlet/const)no-unused-vars: counts the variables as used as theirSymbol.disposeis implicitly called at the end of its scopeprefer-destructuring: allows not destructuring as this would be a parse errorrequire-await+no-await-in-loop: countsawait usingas an awaitNotes:
func-*orno-magic-numbersas they would be runtime errors (have noSymbol.dispose)let/const(e.g.block-scoped-var)no-undef-init: does not need to be updated as it is a parse error for initializing to undefined in this caseno-case-declarations: does not need to be updated as it is a syntax errorIs there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?
no-loop-func@types/estree)one-varas it normalizes the options only to the prior knownvar/let/const(in other wordsusingandawait usingare just ignored)no-unassigned-vars+init-declarations: Have a special condition forconsteven though it is a parse error to omit the initial value. Shouldusingandawait usingbe included?require-await+no-await-in-loop: Should the rule documentation explicitly mentionawait using?