Move template-no-class-bindings to RFC Appendix B - #2843
Closed
NullVoxPopuli wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
The rule returns {} for gjs/gts, so enabling it there was lint cost with
no coverage. Drops it from the gjs/gts recommended set.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Contributor
🏎️ Benchmark Comparison
Full mitata output |
Contributor
Author
|
Closing: |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Stacked on #2840.
template-no-class-bindingsshould not be in the gjs/gts recommended set.The rule opts out of strict mode in its own
create:Its tests assert the same, with the reasoning: "@classBinding in GJS/GTS may be a legitimate component argument". Linting a
.gjsfile with only this rule on reports nothing. Enabling it for gjs/gts is lint time with no coverage, which is the Appendix B criterion.So this moves it from Appendix A to Appendix B: drops
recommendedGjs/recommendedGts, regenerates the rule lists, docs, and the snapshot. The gjs/gts set goes from 88 to 87 rules.The RFC's Appendix A also lists this rule and its Appendix B count says 9. Both need the same move, which the RFC's unresolved-questions section allows without re-RFCing. Say the word and I will push that to the RFC branch.
Alternative, if the maintainer view is that
@classNameBindingspassed to a classic component from a gjs template should be reported: drop the strict-mode guard from the rule instead and keep it in Appendix A. That is a behavior change, so it is not this PR.🤖 Generated with Claude Code