Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Option to ignore lines

Expand Messages
  • crlender
    Hello. JSLint is a great tool, and we re using it a lot. Sometimes, though, we run across situations where we don t agree with JSLint s warnings or
    Message 1 of 4 , Oct 27, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello.

      JSLint is a great tool, and we're using it a lot. Sometimes, though,
      we run across situations where we don't agree with JSLint's warnings
      or recommendations, and where there's no option to adjust its
      behavior. What we're looking for is something like

      // this is just an example
      var x = new Array(10); /*jslint:ignore*/

      In other words, a way to tell JSLint that "we've seen the warning,
      we know what we're doing, and take full responsibility".

      I haven't seen an option to do that, and I suspect that its absence
      is probably intentional. It might lead developers to ignore
      problematic parts in their code instead of fixing them.

      On the other hand, some of the lines that generate warnings are
      intentional, and won't be changed regardless of the JSLint report.
      Seeing the same warnings over and over again could lead people to
      ignore other warnings too, or just run the report through 'grep' to
      filter out certain types of warnings.

      Is there, or will there be, such an option in JSLint?
      If not, what's the rationale?


      - Conrad
    • Douglas Crockford
      ... I recommend that you fix your code instead of documenting that it is intentionally defective.
      Message 2 of 4 , Oct 27, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "crlender" <crlender@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hello.
        >
        > JSLint is a great tool, and we're using it a lot. Sometimes, though,
        > we run across situations where we don't agree with JSLint's warnings
        > or recommendations, and where there's no option to adjust its
        > behavior. What we're looking for is something like
        >
        > // this is just an example
        > var x = new Array(10); /*jslint:ignore*/
        >
        > In other words, a way to tell JSLint that "we've seen the warning,
        > we know what we're doing, and take full responsibility".
        >
        > I haven't seen an option to do that, and I suspect that its absence
        > is probably intentional. It might lead developers to ignore
        > problematic parts in their code instead of fixing them.
        >
        > On the other hand, some of the lines that generate warnings are
        > intentional, and won't be changed regardless of the JSLint report.
        > Seeing the same warnings over and over again could lead people to
        > ignore other warnings too, or just run the report through 'grep' to
        > filter out certain types of warnings.
        >
        > Is there, or will there be, such an option in JSLint?
        > If not, what's the rationale?

        I recommend that you fix your code instead of documenting that it is
        intentionally defective.
      • Stephen M. McKamey
        In this guy s defense, his code isn t necessarily defective, it appears to simply not follow your style guidelines. While most of the JSLint errors are
        Message 3 of 4 , Oct 27, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          In this guy's defense, his code isn't necessarily defective, it
          appears to simply not follow your style guidelines. While most of the
          JSLint "errors" are valid issues, there are a few that are purely
          stylistic, yet they get the same weight as the others.

          Where I've experienced this most is when incorporating other library
          code which I don't (or often can't) maintain. For instance, the
          increasingly popular jQuery library doesn't pass JSLint.

          It would be nice if there was a distinction between the two types of
          issues, perhaps an error list and a warning list. The answer in the
          past to me has been "go ahead and modify it yourself" but this isn't
          realistic because I don't want to have to maintain yet another piece
          of software.

          It is a great product and we'd just like to be able to use it in more
          ways.

          --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "crlender" <crlender@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Hello.
          > >
          > > JSLint is a great tool, and we're using it a lot. Sometimes,
          though,
          > > we run across situations where we don't agree with JSLint's
          warnings
          > > or recommendations, and where there's no option to adjust its
          > > behavior. What we're looking for is something like
          > >
          > > // this is just an example
          > > var x = new Array(10); /*jslint:ignore*/
          > >
          > > In other words, a way to tell JSLint that "we've seen the warning,
          > > we know what we're doing, and take full responsibility".
          > >
          > > I haven't seen an option to do that, and I suspect that its
          absence
          > > is probably intentional. It might lead developers to ignore
          > > problematic parts in their code instead of fixing them.
          > >
          > > On the other hand, some of the lines that generate warnings are
          > > intentional, and won't be changed regardless of the JSLint report.
          > > Seeing the same warnings over and over again could lead people to
          > > ignore other warnings too, or just run the report through 'grep'
          to
          > > filter out certain types of warnings.
          > >
          > > Is there, or will there be, such an option in JSLint?
          > > If not, what's the rationale?
          >
          > I recommend that you fix your code instead of documenting that it is
          > intentionally defective.
          >
        • crlender
          ... Stephen is correct, I m not talking about defective code . I m talking about cases where my idea of good style clashes with your recommendations. Case in
          Message 4 of 4 , Oct 27, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...>
            wrote:
            > I recommend that you fix your code instead of documenting that it is
            > intentionally defective.

            Stephen is correct, I'm not talking about "defective code".
            I'm talking about cases where my idea of good style clashes with
            your recommendations. Case in point, just today I sent a message
            to this group about JSLint issuing warnings about perfectly legal
            and valid regular expressions (for example the character classes
            [^{}] and [#+-]). Your response was to escape the curly brackets
            and the minus sign anyway, even though it wasn't necessary or
            required. This has nothing to do with safe programming habits,
            it's a question of style (or habit) at best. In my opinion,
            unnecessary escaping is a Bad Idea; it reduces readability and
            can thus be a source of errors.

            I didn't expect you to like the idea of /*jslint:ignore*/, but I
            thought I'd ask here before I implemented it myself. We're using
            a wrapper for JSLint on the command line anyway (we're using
            SpiderMonkey instead of Rhino, and have added support for command
            line options and local configuration files), and an output filter
            will be trivial to add.


            - Conrad
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.