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

Fix: no-param-reassign false positive on destructuring (fixes #8279) #8281

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Mar 20, 2017

Conversation

not-an-aardvark
Copy link
Member

@not-an-aardvark not-an-aardvark commented Mar 18, 2017

What is the purpose of this pull request? (put an "X" next to item)

[x] Bug fix (#8279)

What changes did you make? (Give an overview)

This updates no-param-reassign to stop traversing up the AST if it encounters a Property node where the variable reference is part of the key.

This fix keeps the general strategy of the rule in place. However, while I haven't investigated it in depth, the rule strategy seems a bit fragile -- it reports any reference to a variable on the left side of an assignment, excluding some specific cases such as computed properties. It's possible there are more cases like this that cause false positives -- if so, we might want to rethink how this rule is implemented.

Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?

Nothing in particular

This updates no-param-reassign to stop traversing up the AST if it encounters a Property node where the variable reference is part of the key.
@not-an-aardvark not-an-aardvark added accepted There is consensus among the team that this change meets the criteria for inclusion bug ESLint is working incorrectly rule Relates to ESLint's core rules labels Mar 18, 2017
@eslintbot
Copy link

LGTM

code: "function foo(bar) { ({foo: bar.a} = {}); }",
parserOptions: { ecmaVersion: 6 },
options: [{ props: true }],
errors: [{ message: "Assignment to property of function parameter 'bar'." }]
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd like to see the test function foo(a) { ({a} = obj); } as invalid.

@eslintbot
Copy link

LGTM

Copy link
Member

@mysticatea mysticatea left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thank you!

I had been worried that it does not check computed property.

@not-an-aardvark not-an-aardvark merged commit ddc6350 into master Mar 20, 2017
@not-an-aardvark not-an-aardvark deleted the no-param-reassign-object-patterns branch March 20, 2017 14:11
@eslint-deprecated eslint-deprecated bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 6, 2018
@eslint-deprecated eslint-deprecated bot added the archived due to age This issue has been archived; please open a new issue for any further discussion label Feb 6, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
accepted There is consensus among the team that this change meets the criteria for inclusion archived due to age This issue has been archived; please open a new issue for any further discussion bug ESLint is working incorrectly rule Relates to ESLint's core rules
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants