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.

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

feat(eslint-plugin): [no-unsafe-declaration-merging] switch to use scope analysis instead of type information #5865

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 24, 2022
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
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
45 changes: 33 additions & 12 deletions packages/eslint-plugin/src/rules/no-unsafe-declaration-merging.ts
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
import type { Scope } from '@typescript-eslint/scope-manager';
import type { TSESTree } from '@typescript-eslint/utils';
import * as ts from 'typescript';
import { AST_NODE_TYPES } from '@typescript-eslint/utils';

import * as util from '../util';

Expand All @@ -10,7 +11,7 @@ export default util.createRule({
docs: {
description: 'Disallow unsafe declaration merging',
recommended: 'strict',
requiresTypeChecking: true,
requiresTypeChecking: false,
},
messages: {
unsafeMerging:
Expand All @@ -20,17 +21,22 @@ export default util.createRule({
},
defaultOptions: [],
create(context) {
const parserServices = util.getParserServices(context);
const checker = parserServices.program.getTypeChecker();

function checkUnsafeDeclaration(
scope: Scope,
node: TSESTree.Identifier,
unsafeKind: ts.SyntaxKind,
unsafeKind: AST_NODE_TYPES,
): void {
const tsNode = parserServices.esTreeNodeToTSNodeMap.get(node);
const type = checker.getTypeAtLocation(tsNode);
const symbol = type.getSymbol();
if (symbol?.declarations?.some(decl => decl.kind === unsafeKind)) {
const variable = scope.set.get(node.name);
if (!variable) {
return;
}

const defs = variable.defs;
if (defs.length <= 1) {
return;
}

if (defs.some(def => def.node.type === unsafeKind)) {
context.report({
node,
messageId: 'unsafeMerging',
Expand All @@ -41,11 +47,26 @@ export default util.createRule({
return {
ClassDeclaration(node): void {
if (node.id) {
checkUnsafeDeclaration(node.id, ts.SyntaxKind.InterfaceDeclaration);
// by default eslint returns the inner class scope for the ClassDeclaration node
// but we want the outer scope within which merged variables will sit
const currentScope = context.getScope().upper;
if (currentScope == null) {
return;
}

checkUnsafeDeclaration(
currentScope,
node.id,
AST_NODE_TYPES.TSInterfaceDeclaration,
);
}
},
TSInterfaceDeclaration(node): void {
checkUnsafeDeclaration(node.id, ts.SyntaxKind.ClassDeclaration);
checkUnsafeDeclaration(
context.getScope(),
node.id,
AST_NODE_TYPES.ClassDeclaration,
);
},
};
},
Expand Down
Expand Up @@ -80,23 +80,19 @@ class Foo {}
},
{
code: `
namespace Foo {
export interface Bar {}
}
namespace Foo {
export class Bar {}
}
Comment on lines -83 to -88
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

note - we can no longer detect cases like this (as I mentioned here #5854 (comment)).

I think this is an okay trade-off as it should be really rare that someone is declaration merging via a declaration merged namespace.

Copy link
Contributor

@yeonjuan yeonjuan Oct 24, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it seems good trade off. i tried to handle these kinds of cases but i couldn't finish until now 😅

class Foo {}
interface Foo {}
`,
errors: [
{
messageId: 'unsafeMerging',
line: 3,
column: 20,
line: 2,
column: 7,
},
{
messageId: 'unsafeMerging',
line: 6,
column: 16,
line: 3,
column: 11,
},
],
},
Expand Down