Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

docs: Mention character classes in no-useless-escape #15421

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Dec 20, 2021
Merged

docs: Mention character classes in no-useless-escape #15421

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
46c39a4
docs: Mention character classes in no-useless-escape
SebastianSimon Dec 12, 2021
ddb5d32
Make it clear which of the brackets needs escaping
SebastianSimon Dec 18, 2021
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 4 additions & 2 deletions docs/rules/no-useless-escape.md
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -26,7 +26,8 @@ Examples of **incorrect** code for this rule:
`\#{foo}`;
/\!/;
/\@/;

/[\[\]]/;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This example might be misleading because only one of the two escapes is useless, so it might be better to remove the other from the example?

Suggested change
/[\[\]]/;
/[\[]/;

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should the “correct” example also be adjusted? When the “incorrect” and “correct” examples are compared, it’s clear which escape is useless. I was kind of trying to include realistic examples and I’m not sure if /[\[]/ qualifies. Still, not sure what the best set of examples is.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We can add to “correct” examples both /[[]/; to mirror the incorrect /[\[]/;, and /[[\]]/; to show that \] isn't useless.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It looks a bit redundant this way. I think it looks good if in “incorrect”, there’s the example /[\[]/;, and in “correct”, there’s the two examples /[[]/; and /[\]]/.

(By the way, sorry for the delay. This week was busy…)

/[a-z\-]/;
```

Examples of **correct** code for this rule:
Expand All @@ -46,7 +47,8 @@ Examples of **correct** code for this rule:
/\\/g;
/\t/g;
/\w\$\*\^\./;

/[[\]]/;
/[a-z-]/;
```

## When Not To Use It
Expand Down