Update rule define-macros-order for custom macros
#2501
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
FloEdelmann
requested changes
Jul 9, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If
defineExposeis declared inside theorder, I guess it should be ignored? Otherwise it would conflict withdefineExposeLastI guess.
Yeah, it would conflict. However, it's better to not fail silently, but to validate the options: If defineExposeLast is true and defineExpose is declared inside the order, throw an error.
Anyway, thanks for picking this up so fast!
FloEdelmann
requested changes
Jul 9, 2024
FloEdelmann
approved these changes
Jul 9, 2024
|
You're welcome! Really happy to add this 😁 |
ota-meshi
requested changes
Jul 13, 2024
Changing items accepted by the rule. Co-authored-by: Flo Edelmann <[email protected]>
Tests formatting Co-authored-by: Flo Edelmann <[email protected]>
It does not look for any "CallExpression" but for more specific contexts that target macros.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is my very first contribution to this project so I hope I did the things well; but don't hesitate to tell me what is not right. 😄
This PR adds the ability to use the define macro order rule for any macro specified in the
orderarray. This allows users to specifydefinePagefor example or any macro wanted.Basically, I added a
CallExpressionthat checks whether the Identifier is included into theorderarray but not in theORDER_SCHEMAas this is already checked with earlier events (onDefineExposeExitetc.)I removed the
enumfrom thepropertiesof the rule as it's no longer limited toORDER_SCHEMA. And finally, I've added new tests.I also have some questions:
defineExposeis declared inside theorder, I guess it should be ignored? Otherwise it would conflict withdefineExposeLastI guess.ORDER_SCHEMAin the condition? (removing the callbacks and the call tohas()).See #2499