infra(unicorn): numeric-separators-style

[ST-DDT]

Ref: #2439

• Check eslint-plugin-unicorn rules to enable/configure/disable #2439

---

Permanently disables the unicorn/numeric-separators-style lint rule.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for fakerjs ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	2313c99
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/fakerjs/deploys/6663f65a6a403100082387db
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2815.fakerjs.dev
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[ST-DDT]

Not sure about this one. Sometimes it looks useful, at other times the numbers aren't actual numbers...

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.96%. Comparing base (3ae9393) to head (2313c99).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             next    #2815   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.95%   99.96%           
=======================================
  Files        2987     2987           
  Lines      216037   216037           
  Branches      946      952    +6     
=======================================
+ Hits       215936   215956   +20     
+ Misses        101       81   -20     

see 2 files with indirect coverage changes

[Shinigami92]

Sill thinking that it looks weird for digits <= 5 🤷

[matthewmayer]

I'm not convinced about the need for this rule. I think we could leave it up to authors to use separators when appropriate.

[xDivisionByZerox]

I've evaluated the proposed rule again and it has become apparent for me that its implementation could generally enhance the uniformity of "magic number" definitions within a codebase. However, our repository's unique context, where numeric values often carry specific meanings, may be compromised by the adoption of numeric separator syntax. This concern was previously expressed by @matthewmayer (see here) as well.

While it is possible to configure the rule to enforce separators only where they currently exist, thereby standardizing their usage (e.g., in groups of three), this approach contradicts the rationale for introducing the rule in the first place.

Given these considerations, I propose that we opt not to include this rule in our ruleset.

[ST-DDT]

Team Decision

• We will disable this rule permanently