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.
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
Make engine code more straightforward #5529
Comments
Here's a couple of thoughts on this. From memory, so maybe inaccurate.
stylelint._lintsource().then(() => {
return stylelint._createStylelintResult();
}); But it's quite tricky to follow the logic through. A while ago I tried switching the promises over to use
I'm not up to date on processors, but maybe the following statements are true... Syntaxes replace processors? But the CSS-in-JS syntax lacks some features available in the styled-components processor? And the recent addition of |
Nice. That'd make it easier to grok what's going on in the file.
Yes, we may be able to remove the deprecated processor functionality in favour of only using syntaxes in |
As |
Closing as we have an issue for that already: #3408 |
The stylelint code base has grown over time, especially around the engine. How can we untangle that part of the code to make it easier to add features, like
overrides
, in the future?Is it something we can do iteratively through refactors or are more substantial changes needed? For example, if providing stylelint as a PostCSS plugin is a cause, then we could drop that in favour of just the Node API and CLI.
(Caveat: the engine is the part of stylelint that I know the least about. I focused on the rules, even from the very beginning.)
I believe @m-allanson's pull request for the browser entry point (and the refactoring that came out of it) is the only work we've done to map out and refactor the internals before, so feel free to share which areas are problematic and any ideas you may have for untangling the code.
Ref: #5521 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: