Add a way to disable absolute-first option explicitly

[TheCrueltySage]

Fixes #1661 .
Not sure if the alternative should be just an empty string or an explicit disable option. Went for the second for now.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.04%) to 97.841% when pulling 1a3a128 on TheCrueltySage:master into efd6be1 on benmosher:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 97.839% when pulling 94e0c4b on TheCrueltySage:master into 12971f5 on benmosher:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 97.839% when pulling 94e0c4b on TheCrueltySage:master into 12971f5 on benmosher:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 97.839% when pulling 94e0c4b on TheCrueltySage:master into 12971f5 on benmosher:master.

[TheCrueltySage]

Any news on this? It's literally a one-liner change.

[ljharb]

Sorry it took me so long to review. We'd need test cases for this in order to accept it.

[TheCrueltySage]

I don't have much experience in writing tests.
What do you mean by a test case here? As in, checking that absolute-first doesn't trigger with 'disable-absolute-first' option?

[TheCrueltySage]

Something like this?

[TheCrueltySage]

Such a test cannot exist. This option doesn't actually do anything by itself, it's purely structural, intended for reset to default behavior. In particular, if a config you source from sets 'absolute-first', this options allows you to actually unset it. Before, we did it by passing through an empty string to options, but the new consistency checks on this options prevent you from doing that, so I set out to fix that. I honestly think it's a bug, not an enhancement, since it's the default validation that is overly restrictive, there's no new functionality here. It could have as well have been an empty string, I just figured explicitly writing you want to turn it off might be nicer to look at. Perhaps this only confuses people, and I should have gone with an empty string instead. Bottom line is, 'disable-absolute-first' doesn't have any behavior that differs from how things work by default, it's only intended to reset options if they aren't default already.

[ljharb]

Thanks, I think i get it now :-)

[TheCrueltySage]

So, should I merge explicit 'disable-absolute-first', or is an empty string option better? I'm kinda in doubt here. Or are both fine?

[ljharb]

This one's good; an empty string is super confusing.