Fix: no-extra-parens reported some parenthesized IIFEs (fixes #9140) #9158
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
|
LGTM |
not-an-aardvark
added
accepted
|
@not-an-aardvark, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the history of the files in this pull request, we identified @mysticatea, @vitorbal and @aladdin-add to be potential reviewers. |
platinumazure
approved these changes
Aug 26, 2017
eslint-deprecated
bot
added
the
archived due to age
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What is the purpose of this pull request? (put an "X" next to item)
[x] Bug fix (#9140)
What changes did you make? (Give an overview)
This updates
no-extra-parensto handle IIFEs more consistently by doing an IIFE check as part of thereportcall, rather than overloading the precedence calculation with special logic for IIFEs.The bug occurred because the rule was assuming that the precedence calculation would always return -1 for an IIFE, preventing it from ever being reported (since any surrounding parens would always be considered necessary). However, the
ReturnStatementlistener doesn't check the precedence of its argument (since it correctly assumes thatreturnstatements have the lowest precedence), so it incorrectly caused the IIFE to be reported.Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?
Nothing in particular