Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: Introduce a way to suppress violations #119

Open
wants to merge 27 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
27 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
a99c456
Add RFC for baseline support
softius Apr 22, 2024
f9b3976
Fix typos
softius Apr 22, 2024
c9a718c
Add question about warnings
softius May 6, 2024
4d73750
Convert relative to full paths
softius May 6, 2024
9e035f1
Replace --generate-baseline with --baseline/-location
softius May 6, 2024
ed01be1
Add more implementation details, add relative paths to CWD
softius May 8, 2024
d5411af
Update designs/2024-baseline-support/README.md
softius May 30, 2024
98779dc
Remove references to the deprecated engine
softius Jul 27, 2024
b343ddb
Rename default baseline file to eslint-baseline.json
softius Jul 27, 2024
ad5343d
Include more implementation details
softius Jul 27, 2024
485f684
Add link for no-explicit-any
softius Aug 1, 2024
70a7c56
Always update the baseline to update addressed violations
softius Aug 1, 2024
4462ce6
Update designs/2024-baseline-support/README.md
softius Aug 1, 2024
1a1cbba
Add more details for matching against the baseline, and keeping the b…
softius Aug 1, 2024
71ee661
Fix lists formatting
softius Aug 1, 2024
2d4dc84
Minor adjs
softius Aug 1, 2024
dc2d940
First iteration to replace the concept of baseline with suppressions.
softius Aug 2, 2024
b8a1cf7
Fix header and other minor adjustments
softius Aug 2, 2024
0c3d9a4
Simplify language
softius Aug 3, 2024
4fea00e
Revise return types
softius Aug 3, 2024
42d8b95
Minor cleanup
softius Aug 3, 2024
bff622d
Allow to pass multiple rules
softius Aug 6, 2024
48e9d0a
Fix typo
softius Aug 6, 2024
46cf6ae
Update designs/2024-baseline-support/README.md
softius Aug 9, 2024
a94a50d
Fix typo
softius Aug 16, 2024
861f1a4
Use block comments
softius Aug 16, 2024
566e3b9
More details about prune-suggestions and how the filtering works.
softius Aug 16, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
379 changes: 379 additions & 0 deletions designs/2024-baseline-support/README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,379 @@
- Repo: eslint/eslint
- Start Date: 2024-04-20
- RFC PR: (leave this empty, to be filled in later)
- Authors: [Iacovos Constantinou](https://github.com/softius)

# Introduce a way to suppress violations

## Summary

<!-- One-paragraph explanation of the feature. -->

Suppress existing violations, so that they are not being reported in subsequent runs. It allows developers to enable one or more lint rules and be notified only when new violations show up.

## Motivation

<!-- Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected
outcome? -->

Enabling a new lint rule as `error` can be painful when the codebase has many violations and the rule isn't auto-fixable. A good example is [`@typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any`](https://typescript-eslint.io/rules/no-explicit-any/). Unless the rule is enabled during the early stages of the project, it becomes harder and harder to enable it as the codebase grows. Existing violations must be resolved before enabling the rule, but while doing that other violations might creep in.

This can be counterintuitive for enabling new rules as `error`, since the developers need to address the violations before-hand in one way or another. The suggested solution suppress existing violations, allowing the developers to address these at their own pace. It also reports any new violations making it easier to identify and address them.

## Detailed Design

<!--
This is the bulk of the RFC.

Explain the design with enough detail that someone familiar with ESLint
can implement it by reading this document. Please get into specifics
of your approach, corner cases, and examples of how the change will be
used. Be sure to define any new terms in this section.
softius marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
-->

We are storing all the violations that we would like to suppress into a separate file. This file is a JSON file containing the number of errors that must be ignored for each rule in each file. By design, no violations are suppressed - in other words, this feature doesn't affect existing or new projects, unless the developers explicitly suppress one or more violations.

### File format

The JSON file includes details about the file where the violations are found, the rule name and the number of violations. As an example, the following indicates that the file `"src/app/components/foobar/foobar.component.ts"` has one violation for the rule `@typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any` that we want to suppress. All paths are relative to CWD, for portability reasons.

```
{
"src/app/components/foobar/foobar.component.ts": {
"@typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any": {
count: 1
}
}
}
```

The file is stored in `.eslint-suppressions.json` , unless otherwise specified.

### Suppressing all violations

A new option `--suppress-all` wil be introduced to ESLint CLI. When provided, the JSON file is generated and saved in `.eslint-suppressions.json`. If the file already exists, it gets over-written. Note that this is a boolean flag option (no values are accepted).

``` bash
eslint --suppress-all ./src
```

### Suppressing violations of a specific rule

A new option `--suppress-rule [RULE1]` will be introduced to ESLint CLI. When provided, the existing suppressions file will be updated to include any existing violation of the provided rule. The suppressions file will be created if not already exists. Note that this is option can accept an array of string values.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
A new option `--suppress-rule [RULE1]` will be introduced to ESLint CLI. When provided, the existing suppressions file will be updated to include any existing violation of the provided rule. The suppressions file will be created if not already exists. Note that this is option can accept an array of string values.
A new option `--suppress-rule [RULE1]` will be introduced to ESLint CLI. When provided, the existing suppressions file will be updated to include any existing violation of the provided rule. The suppressions file will be created if not already exists. Note that this option can accept an array of string values.


``` bash
eslint --suppress-rule '@typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any' --suppress-rul '@typescript-eslint/member-ordering' ./src
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
eslint --suppress-rule '@typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any' --suppress-rul '@typescript-eslint/member-ordering' ./src
eslint --suppress-rule '@typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any' --suppress-rule '@typescript-eslint/member-ordering' ./src

```

### Changing the location of the suppressions file

A new option `--suppressions-location` will be introduced to ESLint CLI. When provided, the suppressions file will be loaded and saved to the provided location. Note that this is a string flag option (value is required).

``` bash
eslint --suppress-all --suppressions-location /home/user/project/mycache ./src
```

### Maintaining a lean suppressions file

When working with suppressed violations, it's possible to address a violation without updating the suppressions file. This oversight can allow new violations to go unnoticed. To prevent this, eslint can exit with an error code if there are outdated (unmatched) suppressions.

Consider the following scenario:

* The developer runs `eslint --supress-all ./src` to create the suppressions file.
* Running `eslint ./src` reports no violations and exits with status 0.
* After fixing a violation, the suppressions file still contains the now-resolved violation.
* Running `eslint ./src` again reports no violations but exits with a non-zero status code, indicating the suppressions file needs updating.
Copy link
Member

@mdjermanovic mdjermanovic Aug 29, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In this case, will there be an error message, and what would it look like? Technically, will it be a lint message passed to the formatter along with other lint messages for the file, or a separate output?


To address this, a new option `--prune-suppressions` will be introduced to ESLint. This boolean flag removes resolved violations from the suppressions file without adding new ones, unlike `--suppress-all`.

``` bash
eslint --prune-suppressions ./src
eslint --prune-suppressions --suppressions-location /home/user/project/mycache ./src
```

### Execution details

The suggested solution always compares against the existing suppressions file, typically `.eslint-suppressions.json`, unless `--suppressions-location` is specified. This makes it easier for existing and new projects to adopt this feature without the need to adjust scripts in `package.json` and CI/CD workflows.

To perform the comparison, we will go through each result and message from `ESLint.lintFiles`, checking each error `(severity == 2)` against the suppressions file. By design, we ignore warnings since they don't cause eslint to exit with an error code and serve a different purpose. If the file and rule are listed in the suppressions file, we can remove and ignore the result message.

Here is a high-level overview of the execution flow:

1. **Check for Options**
* If both `--suppress-all` and `--suppress-rule` are passed, exit with an error (these options are mutually exclusive).
* If either option is passed, update the suppressions file based on the `results`.
* If no option is passed, check if the suppressions file exists, considering `--suppressions-location`.
2. **Match Errors Against Suppressions**
* For each error, check if the error and the file are in the suppressions file.
* If yes, decrease count, in memory, by 1 and ignore the error unless count is zero.
* If no, keep the error.
3. **Prune unmatched suppressions**
* If `--prune-suppressions` is passed, take the updated suppressions from memory to check which suppressions are left.
* For each suppression left, update the suppressions file by either reducing the count or removing the suppression.
4. **Report and exit**
* Exit with a non-zero status if there are unmatched violations, optionally listing them in verbose mode.
* Otherwise, list remaining errors as usual.

Note that the error detection in `cli.js` occurs before the error counting. This allow us to update the suppressions file and modify the errors, before it is time to count errors. Please refer to the last example of the "Implementation notes" for more details.

Furthermore, ESLint cache (`--cache`) must include the full list of detected violations, even those in the suppressions file. This approach has the following benefits:

- Generating the suppressions file can be based on the cache file and should be faster when the cache file is used.
- Allows developers to update the suppressions file and then re-lint still taking the same cache into consideration.
- It even allows developers to delete the suppressions file and still take advantage of the cached file in subsequent runs.

### Implementation notes

To introduce the above-mentioned options, we will need to:

* add the new options in `default-cli-options.js`.
* adjust the config for optionator.
* add the new options as comments and arguments for eslint.
* update documentation to explain the newly introduced feature.

A new type must be created to represent the suppressions file:

``` js
/**
* @typedef {Record<string, Record<string, { count: number }>} SuppressedViolations
*/
```

A new class must be created to manage the suppressions file:

``` js
class SuppressedViolationsManager {
/**
* Creates a new instance of SuppressedViolationsManager.
* @param {string} suppressionsLocation The location of the suppressions file.
*/
constructor(suppressionsLocation) {}

/**
* Updates the suppressions file based on the current violations.
*
* @param {LintResult[]} results The lint results.
* @returns {void}
*/
suppressAll(results)

/**
* Updates the suppressions file based on the current violations and the provided rule.
*
* @param {LintResult[]} results The lint results.
* @param {string[]} rules The rules to suppress.
* @returns {void}
*/
suppressRules(results, rules)

/**
* Removes old suppressions that do not occur anymore.
* @returns {void}
*/
prune()

/**
* Checks the provided suppressions against the lint results.
*
* For each error included in `results`, checks if the error and the file are in `suppressions`.
* If yes, the count is decreased by 1 and ignores the error unless the count has reached zero.
* Otherwise, it keeps the error.
*
* It returns the lint results that are not in the suppressions file,
* as well as the unmatched suppressions.
*
* @param {LintResult[]} results The lint results.
* @param {SuppressedViolations} suppressions The suppressions.
* @returns {{
* results: LintResult[],
* unmatched: SuppressedViolations
* }}
*/
applySuppressions(results, suppressions)
Comment on lines +175 to +192
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the update. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, so bear with me. It would be helpful if you could add a draft implementation to show how this function will work.

To clarify, this is an example I would like to understand. Suppose you have a file test.js where the no-undef rule would normally report three errors:

/* eslint no-undef: "error" */

a = b + c;

Playground link

What will the function return when the suppression file specifies a count of 2? This is what the arguments will look like:

const results = [{
    filePath: '/my-project/test.js',
    messages: [{
        ruleId: 'no-undef',
        severity: 2,
        message: "'a' is not defined.",
        line: 3,
        column: 1,
        nodeType: 'Identifier',
        messageId: 'undef',
        endLine: 3,
        endColumn: 2
    },
    {
        ruleId: 'no-undef',
        severity: 2,
        message: "'b' is not defined.",
        line: 3,
        column: 5,
        nodeType: 'Identifier',
        messageId: 'undef',
        endLine: 3,
        endColumn: 6
    },
    {
        ruleId: 'no-undef',
        severity: 2,
        message: "'c' is not defined.",
        line: 3,
        column: 9,
        nodeType: 'Identifier',
        messageId: 'undef',
        endLine: 3,
        endColumn: 10
    }],
    suppressedMessages: [],
    errorCount: 3,
    fatalErrorCount: 0,
    warningCount: 0,
    fixableErrorCount: 0,
    fixableWarningCount: 0,
    source: '/* eslint no-undef: "error" */\n\na = b + c;\n',
    usedDeprecatedRules: []
}];

const suppressions = {
    "test.js": {
        "no-undef": {
            count: 2
        }
    }
};

You can see that the input results contains details about each error, while the suppressions are just numbers. What will the call to applySuppressions(results, suppressions) return in this case?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In that case it will return an updated copy of results and an empty object for unmatched (because all suppressions are matched).

// results
const results = [{
    filePath: '/my-project/test.js',
    messages: [
    {
        ruleId: 'no-undef',
        severity: 2,
        message: "'c' is not defined.",
        line: 3,
        column: 9,
        nodeType: 'Identifier',
        messageId: 'undef',
        endLine: 3,
        endColumn: 10
    }],
    suppressedMessages: [],
    errorCount: 1,
    fatalErrorCount: 0,
    warningCount: 0,
    fixableErrorCount: 0,
    fixableWarningCount: 0,
    source: '/* eslint no-undef: "error" */\n\na = b + c;\n',
    usedDeprecatedRules: []
}];

// unmatched
{}

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If I understand correctly, this means removing the first count messages with a particular rule-id from each result, where count is the suppression count. So, in the above example a and b would be suppressed but not c, because in the input result, a and b are sorted first in order of location.

I think this behavior would be very surprising to users. This means that some rule violations would be reported only for (the bottom) part of a file.

I think it would be better to report all messages unfiltered if the suppression count is less than the number of messages, because in that situation we can't make a meaningful selection. So for each file and rule-id we should always report either all messages, or none of them.


/**
* Loads the suppressions file.
* @returns {SuppressedViolations}
*/
load()

/**
* Updates the suppressions file.
* @param {SuppressedViolations} suppressions The suppressions to save.
* @returns {void}
* @private
*/
save(suppressions)
}
```

The resolution of the suppressions file must happen outside of the above class. An idea is to make `getCacheFile` in `lib/eslint/eslint-helpers.js` a bit more abstract so that we can inject the prefix i.e. `.cache_` or `.suppressions_` when a directory is provided. This way both `cache-location` and `suppressions-location` are consistent and following the same pattern.

Once the above are in place, `cli.js` should look something like:

``` js
// ...
if (options.fix) {
debug("Fix mode enabled - applying fixes");
await ActiveESLint.outputFixes(results);
}

const suppressionsFileLocation = getCacheFile(options.suppressionsLocation, cwd, 'suppressions_');
if (options.suppressAll || options.suppressRule || options.pruneSuppressions || fs.existsSync(suppressionsFileLocation)) {
const suppressionsManager = new SuppressedViolationsManager(suppressionsFileLocation);
if (options.suppressAll) {
suppressionsManager.suppressAll(results);
} else if (options.suppressRule) {
suppressionsManager.suppressByRule(results, options.suppressRule);
} else if (options.pruneSuppressions) {
suppressionsManager.prune();
}

const suppressionResults = suppressionsManager.applySuppressions(results, suppressionsManager.load());
if (suppressionResults.unmatched.length > 0) {
// exit with a non-zero code
}

results = suppressionResults.results;
}

let resultsToPrint = results;

if (options.quiet) {
debug("Quiet mode enabled - filtering out warnings");
resultsToPrint = ActiveESLint.getErrorResults(resultsToPrint);
}

//...
```

## Documentation

<!--
How will this RFC be documented? Does it need a formal announcement
on the ESLint blog to explain the motivation?
-->

We should update [Command Line Interface Reference](https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/command-line-interface) to document the newly introduced options. A dedicated section should be added in Documentation to explain how the new suppression system works.

## Drawbacks

<!--
Why should we *not* do this? Consider why adding this into ESLint
might not benefit the project or the community. Attempt to think
about any opposing viewpoints that reviewers might bring up.

Any change has potential downsides, including increased maintenance
burden, incompatibility with other tools, breaking existing user
experience, etc. Try to identify as many potential problems with
implementing this RFC as possible.
-->

The suggested solution can be used only when linting files. It can not be leveraged when using `stdin` since it relies on file paths.

## Backwards Compatibility Analysis

<!--
How does this change affect existing ESLint users? Will any behavior
change for them? If so, how are you going to minimize the disruption
to existing users?
-->

If the suppressions file does not exist, ESLint CLI behavior will not change. This change is therefore backwards compatible to start with.

If the suppressions file is already generated, ESLint CLI will compare the errors against the violations included in the suppressions file. Hence it might report less errors than before and someone might argue that this is not backwards compatible since the behavior changes for them. However, as discussed earlier this should facilitate the adoption of the suggested solution without worrying about adjusting scripts in `package.json` and CI/CD workflow. Plus, the suppressions file can be easily deleted and cancel the new behavior.

Furthermore, we are adding one more reason to exit with an error code (see "Maintaining a lean suppressions file"). This might have some negative side-effects to wrapper scripts that assume that error messages are available when that happens. We could introduce a different exit code, to differentiate between exiting due to unresolved errors or ignored errors that do not occur anymore.

## Alternatives

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the alternative we've introduced at Canva is that we designate specific rules as "in migration" and we only consider reports from those rules if they exist in changed files (according to git comparison against the main branch).

With this system developers must address lint errors if they touch a file but otherwise they can be ignored.

This does require integration with the relevant source control system - though we've found it works quite well.


<!--
What other designs did you consider? Why did you decide against those?

This section should also include prior art, such as whether similar
projects have already implemented a similar feature.
-->

Unfortunately existing approaches do not address the issue at its core and come with their own set of drawbacks. It is worth mentioning that the suggested solution is based on [how baseline works in PHPStan](https://phpstan.org/user-guide/baseline) and bulk suppressions from [@rushstack/eslint-bulk](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@rushstack/eslint-bulk).

The following sections are extracted from [Change Request: Introduce a system to suppress existing errors](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/16755) where [@jfmengels](https://github.com/jfmengels) did a detailed analysis about existing approaches and their drawbacks.

### Using warnings

This use-case is apparently what the "warn" severity level is for.

A large problem with warnings is that as soon as there are more than a few warnings, you don't notice new ones showing up. A common practice I've seen quite often is to avoid warnings altogether, and to only use errors to avoid new problems creeping in. But that doesn't solve the problem of all the existing errors.

Also, users can too easily ignore the new errors, so in a way, the rule is enabled without being enforced when IMO the point of a linter is to enforce rules.

### Using disable comments

One can use disable comments to temporarily suppress errors, by adding a comment like `/* eslint-disable rule-name -- FIX THIS LATER */`

"Disable comments" can be used to enable a rule as an error early, by adding them everywhere where an error is currently reported (and that is actually something that can be automated by some linters).

But "disable comments" have the tendency to be hard to distinguish from other "disable comments" created for reasons such as false positives or disagreements on the rule, especially when there is no enforced need to add a message on the comment. Meaning that once you decide to tackle the existing errors, they can be hard to detect (or to distinguish from ones that are disabled for good reasons).

They also "pollute" the codebase in a way that is quite visible, and makes users numb to the fact of using "disable comments".

### Ignoring parts of the project

It is also possible to simply disable the rule in each file that is currently reporting errors, either through manually configuring the rule in the ESLint config, or by adding a disable comment at the top of the file that disables the rule for the entire file.

This has multiple downsides:

* While new errors are enforced in the other files, new errors can creep in the ignored files
* If/when the errors in the ignored files get removed, the user has to remember to re-enable the rule on this file. Otherwise new errors can creep in.

## Open Questions

<!--
This section is optional, but is suggested for a first draft.

What parts of this proposal are you unclear about? What do you
need to know before you can finalize this RFC?

List the questions that you'd like reviewers to focus on. When
you've received the answers and updated the design to reflect them,
you can remove this section.
-->

None so far.

## Help Needed

<!--
This section is optional.

Are you able to implement this RFC on your own? If not, what kind
of help would you need from the team?
-->

I expect to implement this change.

## Frequently Asked Questions

<!--
This section is optional but suggested.

Try to anticipate points of clarification that might be needed by
the people reviewing this RFC. Include those questions and answers
in this section.
-->

### Does this count warnings?

No, we are only counting errors when updating the suppressions file. Also only errors are considered when checking against the suppressions file.

## Related Discussions

* [Change Request: Introduce a system to suppress existing errors](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/16755)
* [PHPStan - The Baseline](https://phpstan.org/user-guide/baseline)
* [@rushstack/eslint-bulk](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@rushstack/eslint-bulk)

<!--
This section is optional but suggested.

If there is an issue, pull request, or other URL that provides useful
context for this proposal, please include those links here.
-->