FR: validate-decorators #822
Replies: 6 comments
-
WDYT, @JamesHenry? If it isn't something desired for now, I can work on issues
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Awaiting for |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Why not all rules from I extracted them into a single tslint package ng-tslint, and hope they can all be ported into |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
It is already available via #7. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hey @JounQin, I see a lot of rules there that are specific to their ecosystem... can you expand a bit more which rules do you find useful to be part of |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@rafaelss95 I'd like to use |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Currently we have many rules to disallow/enforce decorator properties values. Here's the list:
component-selector
directive-selector
no-host-metadata-property
no-inputs-metadata-property
no-outputs-metadata-property
no-queries-metadata-property
no-pipe-impure
pipe-prefix
prefer-on-push-component-change-detection
relative-url-prefix
use-component-selector
use-component-view-encapsulation
use-injectable-provided-in
Instead of maintaining all these rules, I want bring back the discussion about porting the rule
components#validateDecoratorsRule
, which provides flexibility to support custom options and even custom decorators.Note that it was mentioned sometimes in Codelyzer repo:
An example config could be:
We can discuss about the default config and about how the merge configuration would happen.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions