Docs/Naming: Standardize on "Promise" or "Thenable" in rule names #6012
Replies: 1 comment · 2 replies
-
|
IIRC the name now-a-days yeah promises all the way. I wonder if we can also handle this from a documentation side of things - maybe adding keywords to rule metadata so that you can search for themes instead of relying solely on rule names? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'll defer to @Josh-Cena on Docusaurus best practices 😄. But at the very least, making sure to include "thenable" at least once in all rules that relate to Promises is probably a good idea. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Ah, found the source of the rename: #192 (comment) @mysticatea if you have the time, I'd be curious to get your input on whether this rename should happen? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Before You File a Documentation Request Please Confirm You Have Done The Following...
Suggested Changes
One rule directly refers to Thenables:
@typescript-eslint/await-thenableOther rules refer to Promises:
@typescript-eslint/no-floating-promises@typescript-eslint/no-misused-promises@typescript-eslint/promise-function-asyncIMO it's confusing how only one rule refers to Thenables... even though that's technically the correct term.
Thoughts: should we rename some rule(s) for clarity vs. discoverability? I haven't re-looked deeply into the rules, but if no-floating-promises & no-misused-promises actually work on all Thenables (and not just Promises) then maybe we should call them all thenables? Or maybe most users don't know what a Thenable is, and we should always say Promises?
Affected URL(s)
https://typescript-eslint.io/rules/
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions