586 walk in new rule template

[reduckted]

PR checklist

• Addresses an existing issue: fixes Use a walk function instead of extending AbstractRule in our new-rule templates #586
• New feature, bugfix, or enhancement
  • Includes tests (no tests for new rule template)
• Documentation update (not required)

Overview of change:

I've changed the new rule template to use a walk function instead of a class extending RuleWalker.

When you use a walk function, there's a bit of a difference between a rule with options and one without options (compared to using a RuleWalker), so I've added an additional prompt to ask you if the rule will have options (defaulting to false, because most rules don't have options). The answer to this prompt will change the generated rule slightly.

When the rule has options:

• An empty Options interface is defined, ready to be filled in.
• The options and optionsDescription metadata properties are added with TODO comments.
• The optionExamples metadata property is included.
• The applyWithFunction function is called with the rule's options.
• The WalkContext is defined as WalkContext<Options>.

When the rule does not have options:

• The options and optionsDescription metadata properties are added with blank values and do not need to be changed.
• The optionExamples metadata property is excluded.
• The applyWithFunction function is called without the rule's options.
• The WalkContext is defined as WalkContext<void>.

Since this required a few conditional sections in the template, I've changed the template to use EJS. instead of just being an interpolated string (docs for EJS can be found here).

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

Nope.

[JoshuaKGoldberg]

LGTM but for the templating engines comment; marking a request for changes just to get it answered 😉 but I'm ok with merging as in otherwise. Good stuff!

[JoshuaKGoldberg]

Awesome, thanks!