feat(linter): add no-octal-escape rule
#8151
Conversation
How to use the Graphite Merge QueueAdd either label to this PR to merge it via the merge queue:
You must have a Graphite account in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link. An organization admin has enabled the Graphite Merge Queue in this repository. Please do not merge from GitHub as this will restart CI on PRs being processed by the merge queue. |
github-actions
bot
added
A-linter
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #8151 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
|
| static OCTAL_ESCAPE_PATTERN: OnceLock<Regex> = OnceLock::new(); | ||
|
|
||
| fn get_octal_escape_pattern() -> &'static Regex { | ||
| OCTAL_ESCAPE_PATTERN.get_or_init(|| { | ||
| Regex::new(r"^(?:[^\\]|\\.)*?\\([0-3][0-7]{1,2}|[4-7][0-7]|(08|09)|[1-7])").unwrap() | ||
| }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you can use a lazy_static
oxc/crates/oxc_linter/src/rules/unicorn/throw_new_error.rs
Lines 96 to 99 in bd0693b
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I learned this. fixed: 5aaf7e6
| /// const str = "\xA9"; | ||
| /// ``` | ||
| NoOctalEscape, | ||
| correctness, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think should be possible to have a fixer for this?
could we mark it as pending (unless it's not possible to fix?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this can be auto-fixed, but we need to be careful because it’s impossible to mechanically determine whether the missing backquote was intentional or if u..... should be used instead.
I’ve marked it as pending for now, but the fixer should be implemented as a dangerous auto-fix.
|
It seems like this is already a syntax error, which does not require a linter implementation.
|
Don’t you still think it’s effective for improving compatibility with ESLint? |
baseballyama
force-pushed
the
feat/linter/no-octal-escape
branch
3 times, most recently
from
a9d99de to
daf1aef
Compare
use lazy_static!
baseballyama
force-pushed
the
feat/linter/no-octal-escape
branch
from
daf1aef to
ac4226f
Compare
| × Invalid Unicode escape sequence | ||
| ╭─[no_octal_escape.tsx:1:3] | ||
| 1 │ #\0\01' | ||
| · ─ | ||
| ╰──── | ||
|
|
||
| × Invalid Unicode escape sequence | ||
| ╭─[no_octal_escape.tsx:1:5] | ||
| 1 │ #\0\01' | ||
| · ─ | ||
| ╰──── | ||
|
|
||
| × Unterminated string | ||
| ╭─[no_octal_escape.tsx:1:7] | ||
| 1 │ #\0\01' | ||
| · ─ | ||
| ╰──── | ||
|
|
||
| × Expected `in` but found `Unknown` | ||
| ╭─[no_octal_escape.tsx:1:7] | ||
| 1 │ #\0\01' | ||
| · ┬ | ||
| · ╰── `in` expected | ||
| ╰──── |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ohh a few test cases are failed as unexpected reason. I will check this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
updated: c868ae4
One test did not pass, so I commented it out.
|
looks like it's only a semantic error in strict mode |
implement: https://eslint.org/docs/latest/rules/no-octal-escape