📎 Implement lint/noEmptyBlockStatements - eslint/no-empty eslint/no-empty-static-block #39

Activity

1. Conaclos

   changed the title [-]📎 lint/noEmptyBlockStatements[/-] [+]📎 `lint/noEmptyBlockStatements`[/+] on Aug 23, 2023
2. Conaclos

   changed the title [-]📎 `lint/noEmptyBlockStatements`[/-] [+]📎 Implement `lint/noEmptyBlockStatements`[/+] on Aug 23, 2023
3. Conaclos

   changed the title [-]📎 Implement `lint/noEmptyBlockStatements`[/-] [+]📎 Implement `lint/noEmptyBlockStatements` - `eslint/no-empty` `eslint/no-empty-static-block`[/+] on Aug 23, 2023
4. Conaclos

   added

   A-LinterArea: linterArea: linter

   L-JavaScriptLanguage: JavaScript and super languagesLanguage: JavaScript and super languages

   S-Good first issueStatus: Good for newcomersStatus: Good for newcomers

   on Aug 23, 2023
5. ematipico commented on Aug 28, 2023

   

   ematipico

   on Aug 28, 2023

   Member

   More actions

   What's the difference between this rule and #42? It's worth an explanation in the description
6. Conaclos commented on Aug 28, 2023

   

   Conaclos

   on Aug 28, 2023

   Last edited by Conaclos

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   What's the difference between this rule and #42? It's worth an explanation in the description

   In contrast to #42, the rule prohibits any empty block statements.
   Examples of incorrect code:

   if (cond) {}
   
   while (cond) {}
   
   function f() {}

   However, the following example also triggers #42:

   {}
7. ematipico commented on Aug 28, 2023

   

   ematipico

   on Aug 28, 2023

   Member

   More actions

   So we would have two rules that trigger the same code? That doesn't seem right to me.

   I wonder if at this point if we should have only one rule that handles all the block statements. Or at least make sure that they don't conflict each other.
8. Conaclos commented on Aug 28, 2023

   

   Conaclos

   on Aug 28, 2023

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   I wonder if at this point if we should have only one rule that handles all the block statements

   I think you are right. We could thus regroup these two rule under the noUselessBlockStatements name.
9. andrewangelle commented on Oct 8, 2023

   

   andrewangelle

   on Oct 8, 2023

   Contributor

   More actions

   Hello! If a fix for this issue is still needed, I'd like to give it a shot.
10. Conaclos

    closed this as completedin #521on Oct 16, 2023