fix(prettier): respect prettier config field in "package.json" #570
Conversation
ro0gr
force-pushed
the
sync-prettier-with-prettierd
branch
from
b763bae to
ec4d274
Compare
| -- @param self conform.FormatterConfig | ||
| -- @param ctx conform.Context|conform.RangeContext | ||
| -- @return string[]|nil args the arguments for setting a `prettier` parser if they exist in the options, nil otherwise | ||
| M.prettier_cwd = function(self, ctx) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have a gut feeling it should be a part of some external dependency, so it could be shared between other plugins like nvim-lint, etc. Until then this is only used by 2 formatters, so this does not seem to be the best to share it via a general utils file that is used everywhere. I'm considering to move this into the lua/conform/util/prettier-cwd or smth like that now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As we share the logic between 2 formatters I'd avoid duplicating tests for the second formatter, so I'd test the prettier_cwd( util instead
ro0gr
force-pushed
the
sync-prettier-with-prettierd
branch
from
ec4d274 to
0da505e
Compare
stevearc
left a comment
stevearc
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this could be a lot simpler. In general the util functions are general enough that they might be shared by a lot of different formatters. What if for the prettier formatter you just did
cwd = require("conform.formatters.prettierd").cwd
TLDR; OK, this is definitely easier (not simpler though) to do, so I'll stop overthinking it and make a step back. Thanks. I've tried it initially, but then I could not decide which of both formatters should really own the cwd logic. IMO neither of them should, cause in my "ideal world"(it's beyond the scope of this project, I know!) this logic could be shared out of the conform, for instance with nvim-lint. That's why I feel keeping this as a shared util(via |
|
close in favour of #573 |
2 participants
continues #564
addresses #567