feat(eslint-plugin): [promise-function-async] check for promises in implicit return types #6330
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
|
Thanks for the PR, @ericbf! typescript-eslint is a 100% community driven project, and we are incredibly grateful that you are contributing to that community. The core maintainers work on this in their personal time, so please understand that it may not be possible for them to review your work immediately. Thanks again! 🙏 Please, if you or your company is finding typescript-eslint valuable, help us sustain the project by sponsoring it transparently on https://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint. |
✅ Deploy Preview for typescript-eslint ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #6330 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.61% 90.59% -0.03%
==========================================
Files 372 372
Lines 12709 12712 +3
Branches 3739 3743 +4
==========================================
Hits 11516 11516
- Misses 853 856 +3
Partials 340 340
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
ericbf
changed the title
ericbf
force-pushed
the
promise-function-async-allow-union-in-explicit-types-only
branch
from
3527630
to
c65b905
Compare
bradzacher
changed the title
bradzacher
requested changes
Feb 10, 2023
bradzacher
added
enhancement
When we return a union containing a promise from a function implicitly, it's often a mistake. This commit makes it so if the return type is explicit, any `Promise` in the return type (whether it's part of a union or not) will flag the function. If it is intentional, make the return type explicit. Fixes typescript-eslint#6329
ericbf
force-pushed
the
promise-function-async-allow-union-in-explicit-types-only
branch
from
c30bf71
to
be9531d
Compare
bradzacher
removed
the
awaiting response
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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.
When we return a union containing a promise from a function implicitly, it's often a mistake. This commit makes it so if the return type is explicit, any
Promisein the return type (whether it's part of a union or not) will flag the function. If it is intentional, make the return type explicit.Fixes #6329
PR Checklist
asyncfunctions returning unions with non-Promisetypes #6329Overview
This implements the heuristic that @bradzacher suggested. If the return type is explicit, it allows unions with non-
Promisetypes, but if it is implicit, it flags those.