Init

[delvedor]

Initial code.

Checklist

• run npm run test and npm run benchmark
• tests and/or benchmarks are included
• documentation is changed or added
• commit message and code follows Code of conduct

[mcollina]

lgtm

[mcollina]

lgtm

[mcollina]

lgtm

[mcollina]

lgtm

[jsumners]

For some time now I have been really enamored with named parameters. What do you think of this signature instead?:

Suggested change

	warning.create(name, code, message)
	warning.create({ name, code, message })

[delvedor]

I like to use options objects as parameters when some of those parameters are optional, given that here all of them are mandatory, I think we could keep them as is. Also, this "style" follows the same as the fastify-error package.

[jsumners]

I think they give clarity to the reader. For example, random bit of code:

const warning = fastifyWarning.create('foo', 'fst_foo', 'a warning')

vs

const warning = fastifyWarning.create({ name: 'foo', code: 'fst_foo', message: 'a warning' })

In my opinion, the second is easier to read by anyone, not just those who are already familiar with the API.

[jsumners]

Why not tap?

[delvedor]

Aside from the requirement of using their CLI, I like the design of ava, just wanted to try it a bit.

[jsumners]

That runner requirement is because it always transpiles the code being tested. It makes it unnecessarily difficult to debug things if needed.

Personally, I'd rather see consistency across all "official" modules. 🤷‍♂️

[mcollina]

ava does not transpile the code anymore.

[jsumners]

LGTM

[mcollina]

lgtm