feat: create prefer-equality-matcher rule
#1016
Merged
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
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
create-prefer-equality-matcher
branch
from
9b771cb to
8361bb4
Compare
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
create-prefer-equality-matcher
branch
from
8361bb4 to
2919ce7
Compare
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 25.7.0 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This introduces a rule similar to #1015 that checks for use of the strict equality operators and suggests using built-in matchers instead.
I'm expecting to do some code cleanup later since we've getting a few rules that share common functions, so for now it's straightforward but a bit WET.
This is expected to compliment rules like
prefer-strict-equal&prefer-to-bewhich will handle sorting out the more specific matcher to use.