type_annotate_public_apis reports issues over local non-API functions

[chalin]

Consider the local good() function declared in this test:

test('foo', () {
  good() { ... }
  expect(good, ...);
});

The type_annotate_public_apis lint causes this issue to be reported:

lint • Type annotate public APIs at test/effective_dart_test.dart:28:7 • type_annotate_public_apis

Being a local function, good() should not be considered in this lint.

cc @munificent @kevmoo

[kevmoo]

Agreed!

…

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 2:02 PM Patrice Chalin ***@***.***> wrote: Consider the local good() function declared in this test: test('foo', () { good() { ... } expect(good, ...); }); The type_annotate_public_apis lint causes this issue to be reported: lint • Type annotate public APIs at test/effective_dart_test.dart:28:7 • type_annotate_public_apis Being a local function, good() should not be considered in this lint. cc @munificent <https://github.com/munificent> @kevmoo <https://github.com/kevmoo> — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#57763>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABCiszTrBYaxgbPyB3ILdYGYMbHHXo3ks5uNLpNgaJpZM4VunEv> .

[pq]

+1.

Good catch!

[srawlins]

Ouch, also methods of private classes.

class _C {
  m() {} // BAD LINT
}

[chalin]

Can you add a comment here once this is released publicly?

[srawlins]

I can't promise that. I wish there was a bot for such things.

[pq]

@chalin, @srawlins: I'm curious if you have any thoughts on how we could do better at documenting and publicizing releases. I'm very open to a bot actually if we could decide what exactly it should do.

One thing that occurs to me right away is that the published lint docs reflect HEAD but there's no easy way to see what is defined in a particular SDK. I don't want to clutter the docs w/ badges but maybe something could be done?

For example, what if we added an SDK badge w/ the number of the minimum supporting SDK?

[kevmoo]

what if we added an SDK badge w/ the number of the minimum supporting SDK?

❤️ ❤️ ❤️

[srawlins]

+10, love that idea. Would be very simple to implement with a String API on each rule.