Closed zak-pawel closed 1 month ago
Is there a performance benefit to making this change? It doesn't seem to make the code any easier to read.
Given that list of reasons not to update code, I don't want us to start needing to add in even more nolint statements for something as basic like a for loop. It also seems an unnecessary hurdle for contributors.
So leaning -1
Is there a performance benefit to making this change?
I don't think so.
Also -1 here if we don't see a clear benefit from the change. Both ways of coding it look good to me...
Closing as rejected
Description
This issue starts a discussion about enabling:
It does not suggest updating loops which:
It works for integer literals, const/vars, and expressions that evaluate to an integer
Examples
Before:
After:
Before:
After:
Expected output
Decision about enabling or not enabling this linter.
Findings
For this linter, the following findings were found in the current codebase:
Additional configuration
For this linter, no additional configuration can be provided.