Add include_bare_init option to explicit_init rule
#5203
Conversation
mildm8nnered
changed the title
include_bare_init option to explicit_init rule
Generated by 🚫 Danger |
mildm8nnered
force-pushed
the
mildm8nnered-explicit-init-bare-init-option
branch
from
bb3bd36 to
5dc6cb5
Compare
Source/SwiftLintBuiltInRules/Rules/RuleConfigurations/ExplicitInitConfiguration.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Source/SwiftLintBuiltInRules/Rules/RuleConfigurations/ExplicitInitConfiguration.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| private(set) var severityConfiguration = SeverityConfiguration<Parent>(.warning) | ||
| @ConfigurationElement(key: "include_explicit_init") | ||
| private(set) var includeExplicitInit = true | ||
| @ConfigurationElement(key: "include_bare_init") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Swift calls expression like .init(...) "implicit member expression". Not sure we should use the term in an ExplicitInitRule, though. So "bare" might be okay. What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So I'm not super-happy with "bare". "inferred" sounds a little bit better, and is at least in keeping with existing terms of art, but "inferred_init" doesn't feel quite right, as it's not the "init" that is inferred ... totally open to suggestions if anyone has something better.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm struggling as well. include_implict_init_members maybe?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe bare is ok - "implicit member expression" feels a little obscure
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The name would not matter so much if there was a description added to each option. The infrastructure is there already. I may prepare a PR in the upcoming days to open it up and add a few examples. More can then be attached over time.
Long story short, let's keep "bare". 😉
mildm8nnered
force-pushed
the
mildm8nnered-explicit-init-bare-init-option
branch
from
5dc6cb5 to
919d399
Compare
mildm8nnered
force-pushed
the
mildm8nnered-explicit-init-bare-init-option
branch
from
ed14259 to
6f2d8ad
Compare
mildm8nnered
deleted the
mildm8nnered-explicit-init-bare-init-option
branch
Adds
include_bare_initoption to theexplicit_initrule.This will produce violations where
.initis called using type inference to determine the type.For example:
This option is off by default (as many code bases use the
.initconstruct), and these violations are not correctable, as SwiftLint cannot infer the intended type.Also adds an
include_explicit_initoption, on by default, which allows the original behavior ofexplicit_initto be suppressed, so that users can tune the rule's behavior to suit their particular use case.Replaces #5170, and resolves #2960