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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

feat(linter/oxc): differentiate between array/object in no-accumulating-spread loop diagnostic #5375

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 31, 2024
Merged

feat(linter/oxc): differentiate between array/object in no-accumulating-spread loop diagnostic #5375

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
43 changes: 35 additions & 8 deletions crates/oxc_linter/src/rules/oxc/no_accumulating_spread.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -44,13 +44,26 @@ fn reduce_unknown(spread_span: Span, reduce_span: Span) -> OxcDiagnostic {
])
}

fn loop_spread_diagnostic(
fn loop_spread_likely_object_diagnostic(
accumulator_decl_span: Span,
spread_span: Span,
loop_span: Span,
) -> OxcDiagnostic {
OxcDiagnostic::warn("Do not spread accumulators in loops")
.with_help("Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.\nUsing spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.")
.with_help("Consider using `Object.assign()` to mutate the accumulator instead.\nUsing spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.")
.with_labels([
accumulator_decl_span.label("From this accumulator"),
spread_span.label("From this spread"),
loop_span.label("For this loop")
])
}
fn loop_spread_likely_array_diagnostic(
accumulator_decl_span: Span,
spread_span: Span,
loop_span: Span,
) -> OxcDiagnostic {
OxcDiagnostic::warn("Do not spread accumulators in loops")
.with_help("Consider using `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.\nUsing spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.")
.with_labels([
accumulator_decl_span.label("From this accumulator"),
spread_span.label("From this spread"),
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -221,7 +234,8 @@ fn check_loop_usage<'a>(
return;
};

match assignment_expression.right.get_inner_expression() {
let assignment_expression_right_inner_expr = assignment_expression.right.get_inner_expression();
match assignment_expression_right_inner_expr {
Expression::ArrayExpression(array_expr)
if array_expr.span.contains_inclusive(spread_span) => {}
Expression::ObjectExpression(object_expr)
Expand All @@ -234,11 +248,24 @@ fn check_loop_usage<'a>(
if !parent.kind().span().contains_inclusive(declaration.span)
&& parent.kind().span().contains_inclusive(spread_span)
{
ctx.diagnostic(loop_spread_diagnostic(
declarator.id.span(),
spread_span,
loop_span,
));
match assignment_expression_right_inner_expr {
Expression::ArrayExpression(_) => {
ctx.diagnostic(loop_spread_likely_array_diagnostic(
declarator.id.span(),
spread_span,
loop_span,
));
}
Expression::ObjectExpression(_) => {
ctx.diagnostic(loop_spread_likely_object_diagnostic(
declarator.id.span(),
spread_span,
loop_span,
));
}
// we check above that the expression is either an array or object expression
_ => unreachable!(),
}
}
}
}
Expand Down
28 changes: 14 additions & 14 deletions crates/oxc_linter/src/snapshots/no_accumulating_spread.snap
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -333,7 +333,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -344,7 +344,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -355,7 +355,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -366,7 +366,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -388,7 +388,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -399,7 +399,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -410,7 +410,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -421,7 +421,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -432,7 +432,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -454,7 +454,7 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.

⚠ oxc(no-accumulating-spread): Do not spread accumulators in loops
Expand All @@ -465,5 +465,5 @@ source: crates/oxc_linter/src/tester.rs
· │ ╰── For this loop
· ╰── From this accumulator
╰────
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.push()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
help: Consider using `Object.assign()` to mutate the accumulator instead.
Using spreads within accumulators leads to `O(n^2)` time complexity.