Update file_name rule to match fully-qualified names of nested types
#5841
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
fraioli
commented
Oct 28, 2024
| @@ -21,6 +22,8 @@ final class FileNameRuleTests: SwiftLintTestCase { | |||
| rule = try FileNameRule(configuration: ["suffix_pattern": suffixPattern]) | |||
| } else if let nestedTypeSeparator { | |||
| rule = try FileNameRule(configuration: ["nested_type_separator": nestedTypeSeparator]) | |||
| } else if let fullyQualified { | |||
| rule = try FileNameRule(configuration: ["fully_qualified": fullyQualified]) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Open to other names here such as require_fully_qualified, require_fully_qualified_names, etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the last one most.
This PR is aimed to address Issue realm#5840. It does the following: 1. Allows the `file_name` rule to match nested types when using fully-qualified names, meaning naming the following file `Nested.MyType.swift` is no longer a violation: ``` // Nested.MyType.swift enum Nested { struct MyType { } } ``` 2. Introduces a new option `fully_qualified` to have the `file_name` rule enforce using fully-qualified names, meaning naming the above file `MyType.swift` instead of `Nested.MyType.swift` would become a violation where it wasn't before (naming the file `Nested.swift` would still not be a violation).
fraioli
force-pushed
the
File-Name-Rule-Violations-With-Nested-Types
branch
from
9399bc9
to
904bad2
Compare
SimplyDanny
requested changes
Nov 3, 2024
Source/SwiftLintBuiltInRules/Rules/Idiomatic/FileNameRule.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Source/SwiftLintBuiltInRules/Rules/Idiomatic/FileNameRule.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Source/SwiftLintBuiltInRules/Rules/Idiomatic/FileNameRule.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
SimplyDanny
reviewed
Nov 16, 2024
| extension StructDeclSyntax: TypeNameCollectible {} | ||
| extension TypeAliasDeclSyntax: TypeNameCollectible {} | ||
| extension EnumDeclSyntax: TypeNameCollectible {} | ||
| extension ProtocolDeclSyntax: TypeNameCollectible {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a lot of overhead only to spare one more method. Honestly, I'd prefer to go with a visit(name:String) and a visit(node:NamedDeclSyntax). The latter can just redirect to the first after extracting the name. And visit(_: ExtensionDeclSyntax) can call it directly.
| names.insert(name) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| ancestorNames.push(node.typeName) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| ancestorNames.push(node.typeName) | |
| ancestorNames.push(name) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is aimed to address Issue #5840. It does the following:
file_namerule to match nested types when using fully-qualified names, meaning naming the following fileNested.MyType.swiftis no longer a violation:fully_qualifiedto have thefile_namerule enforce using fully-qualified names, meaning naming the above fileMyType.swiftinstead ofNested.MyType.swiftwould become a violation where it wasn't before (naming the fileNested.swiftwould still not be a violation).