eslint-config-standard VS proposal-pattern-matching

eslint-config-standard

Based on your requirements and environment, answer the questions accordingly. At least with eslint version 8.0.1, you are only presented with 2 style guides: standard and XO. Personally, I prefer the standard styling guide but at any give time, it is a personal choice and as such feel free to choose any from a bunch of available options. Once all dependencies are installed, ensure that you have the following packages added as devDependencies to your project:

Hmm right, haven't found too many controversial things in https://github.com/standard/eslint-config-standard/blob/master/.eslintrc.json, besides no-semi fixed by semi-standard and comma-dangle "never" (sucks for git history, they should allow it for multiline cases https://eslint.org/docs/rules/comma-dangle#always-multiline)

ESLint plugin for StandardJS; allows you to format code as StandardJS, but clear more serious errors too.

The JS Open Source Community is filled with people grifting things like this. Quite notably, there's a linter called JS Standard Style, which actually has nothing to do with JS Standards.

It's marketed as if it was a standard, the fact that it isn't is tucked away in the readme, and also -- the entire project is just a wrapper around someones .eslintrc file, yet barely any credit is given to the ESLint devs who do all the work.

Go ahead and read the readme here, https://github.com/standard/standard. Could you genuinely tell this wasn't really a JS Standard at a glance? Could you tell this was just a config file for someone elses work? None of the donations go upstream to eslint by the way.

Hell, the actual config file is hidden inside a sub repo:

https://github.com/standard/eslint-config-standard

which has the audacity to claim

> This module is for advanced users. You probably want to use standard instead :)

It's a config file for someone elses program! Why does this library go through so much effort to hide that it's just someones config file? Why on earth is it called JS Standard Style?

The whole community is filled with slimy nonsense like this.

Eslint is the default linter. Standard is a curated list of rules with good quality.

https://github.com/standard/eslint-config-standard

I would start with that and tweak what you don't like

Well done, we managed to set up ESLint using Airbnb’s JavaScript styling guide to our newly created Next.js project. You could have used another popular styling guide like Google, Standard, or even create your own to your liking.

Note, however, that there is a proposal to add pattern matching to JS.

There's an ECMAScript proposal that is in the works to add this feature to the language! It's going to look something like this.

More importantly, TypeScript typically commits to build things into itself when the proposal in JavaScript reaches Stage 3. The pattern matching proposal in JavaScript is Stage 1, but depends on many other proposals as well that may or may not need to be at Stage 3 as well for it to work. This particular proposal is interested on pattern matching on JavaScript Objects and other primitives, just like Python does with it’s native primitives. These are also dynamic types which helps in some areas, but makes it harder than others. Additionally, the JavaScript type annotations proposal needs to possibly account for this. So it’s going to be awhile. Like many years.

For true™ functional programming in JS, native pattern matching and partial function application are missing (at least for now: 1, 2). For proper OOP, it lacks real interfaces and compile-time dependency injection.

The proposal for pattern matching syntax seems more akin to what they're looking for.

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pattern-matching

There's a proposal to add something like that to JavaScript but it's been stuck in limbo since 2017 although there are libraries like ts-pattern which implement it already.

I'll admit, it is easy to assert that the TypeScript language should not be involved in the matters of packages but I also wonder if we're moving towards a point where interfaces will be as common as namespaces and whether or not it would be sensible for the language to incorporate such type assertions into the language formally, after all, it already compiles to various forms of JavaScript and there is a stage 1 proposal submitted to the TC39 committee to give JavaScript pattern matching. If adopted, wouldn't it make sense to allow TypeScript to compile a type into a type guard for the native JavaScript pattern matcher?

Both are active tc39 proposals :)

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator - Stage 2

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pattern-matching - Stage 1

Hopefully we get both in the next couple of years.

We often add promising TC39 proposals into Civet so people can experiment without waiting.

We've added https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator, a variant of https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pattern-matching, a variant of https://github.com/tc39/proposal-string-dedent and others.

Since our goal is to be 99% compatible with ES we'll need to accommodate any proposals that become standard and pick up anything TC39 leaves on the table (rest parameters in any position, etc.)