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

Re: [jslint] Feature request: disable warnings on a line-by-line basis

Expand Messages
  • Noah Peters
    Try this: var o = {test: 4}; /*jslint forin: false*/ for (k in o) { alert(k); } /*jslint forin: true*/ ... -- We know the hard things are possible, we just
    Message 1 of 4 , Mar 4, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Try this:
      var o = {test: 4};
      /*jslint forin: false*/
      for (k in o) {
      alert(k);
      }
      /*jslint forin: true*/

      On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:11 PM, bertbelder <bertbelder@...> wrote:

      > It would be cool if it were possible to surpress warnings/errors that
      > originate form a certain line.
      >
      > For example, occasionaly I conciously use an unfiltered for...in loop or
      > switch(true) construct, but I'd rather not disable messages about these
      > types of errors globally (which isn't even possible for the latter). When
      > you're working on large scripts serious warnings tend to be surrounded by
      > 'errors' that you know are there for a reason, which makes them hard to
      > spot.
      >
      > So maybe there should be an option like /*jslint surpress*/ that surpresses
      > any errors on the next line, like:
      >
      > var o = {test: 4};
      > /*jslint surpress*/
      > for (k in o) {
      > alert(k);
      > }
      >
      > PS: I'm truly sorry about the bogus message with the same topic I sent
      > before.
      >
      >
      >



      --
      We know the hard things are possible, we just have to make the easy things
      easy. -Norman Walsh


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • bertbelder
      Thank s, I didn t realize that it was possible to set jslint options for a part of the file. However, there are still warnings I d like to suprpress sometimes
      Message 2 of 4 , Mar 12, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Thank's, I didn't realize that it was possible to set jslint options for a part of the file. However, there are still warnings I'd like to suprpress sometimes for which no such option exists. So what do you think about the proposed ignore-line feature?

        --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Noah Peters <boyopeg@...> wrote:
        >
        > Try this:
        > var o = {test: 4};
        > /*jslint forin: false*/
        > for (k in o) {
        > alert(k);
        > }
        > /*jslint forin: true*/
        >
        > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:11 PM, bertbelder <bertbelder@...> wrote:
        >
        > > It would be cool if it were possible to surpress warnings/errors that
        > > originate form a certain line.
        > >
        > > For example, occasionaly I conciously use an unfiltered for...in loop or
        > > switch(true) construct, but I'd rather not disable messages about these
        > > types of errors globally (which isn't even possible for the latter). When
        > > you're working on large scripts serious warnings tend to be surrounded by
        > > 'errors' that you know are there for a reason, which makes them hard to
        > > spot.
        > >
        > > So maybe there should be an option like /*jslint surpress*/ that surpresses
        > > any errors on the next line, like:
        > >
        > > var o = {test: 4};
        > > /*jslint surpress*/
        > > for (k in o) {
        > > alert(k);
        > > }
        > >
        > > PS: I'm truly sorry about the bogus message with the same topic I sent
        > > before.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > --
        > We know the hard things are possible, we just have to make the easy things
        > easy. -Norman Walsh
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • Douglas Crockford
        ... I think it is better to fix your code than to document that it is intentionally faulty.
        Message 3 of 4 , Mar 13, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "bertbelder" <bertbelder@...> wrote:
          >
          > However, there are still warnings I'd like to suprpress sometimes
          > for which no such option exists. So what do you think about the
          > proposed ignore-line feature?

          I think it is better to fix your code than to document that it is intentionally faulty.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.