Open Smaug123 opened 7 months ago
Hey,
we are fine with the additional reporting of non-matching globs.
But we shoudln't force the users of FSharp.Analyzers.SDK.Client
(Editors like Ionide/FSAC) to take a dependency on Glob
.
So if you can do the necessary changes while keeping the SDK API in it's current state, that would be great.
Cool - I'll make the change only in the CLI tool.
How would you feel about having IncludeFilter and ExcludeFilter be
Glob list
, instead ofstring -> bool
? The FSharp.Analyzers.Cli consumer in this repo does this:But what I would really like is to be able to report "this particular glob was never matched - are you sure you got it right?". That's because when I first tried using
--exclude-analyzers
, I used the nameGRA-PARTAPP-001
rather than the correctPartialAppAnalyzer
, and it was sheer coincidence that I happened to be in a repo where that warning was already firing (so I noticed I had failed to suppress it).(Doing this would require running every glob against every analyzer, but there's presumably not going to be more than 10k analyzers ever, so that isn't going to be too much of a slowdown.)
{Include/Exclude}Filter
to hold only a list of globs. That way, the analyzer SDK could tally how many times it matched each glob against an analyzer, and report the result. Disadvantages: breaking change which possibly removes functionality downstream consumers were depending on; another dependency (to obtainGlob
)Which of those two would you prefer, if either? (I'm happy to implement either.)