Fix implicit_getter false positive#5300
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Generated by 🚫 Danger |
SimplyDanny
approved these changes
Oct 25, 2023
SimplyDanny
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me. Thanks!
Please also add an entry to the CHANGELOG to credit yourself and let others know about the fix.
SimplyDanny
approved these changes
Nov 5, 2023
Collaborator
|
You need to remove the |
Contributor
Author
|
@SimplyDanny do you know what Danger is complaining about? |
Collaborator
It doesn't like merge commits. Please rebase and force-push instead. |
4b25fbe to
9f9ebc1
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
@SimplyDanny looks like we're green! |
yuya-okuse
pushed a commit
to yuya-okuse/SwiftLint
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 16, 2023
MartijnAmbagtsheer
pushed a commit
to MartijnAmbagtsheer/SwiftLint
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 20, 2023
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The
implicit_getterrule wasn't aware of theinitaccessor (SE-0400), causing it to incorrectly trigger on the following exampleRather than adding a check for
initAccessorI updated the check to bail early unlessaccessorsListhas a single element, that beingget. This allows for forwards-compatibility if another accessor variant were to be introduced in the future. Semantically, IIUC this rule should only trigger in the aforementioned case that there's one accessor and that accessor isget— otherwise it isn't possible to elide the keyword.