ls-lint
errcheck
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
ls-lint
- After 2.3 million downloads: ls-lint v2.0.0 is finally here!
-
An ESlint plugin for consistent filename and folder naming. Allows you to enforce a consistent naming pattern for the filename and folder.
There is also https://github.com/loeffel-io/ls-lint
-
Today is the day: ls-lint just reached more then 1 million downloads
ls-lint is an extremely fast directory and filename linter: GitHub 1 million npm downloads and over ~110 000 downloads per month is huge! Thank you to all users that made this happen! <3 This day also marks the release of the version 1.11.0 which brings several improvements: - Massive performance improvements: up to 1100% faster to version 1.10.x (see benchmarks) - New SCREAMING_SNAKE_CASE rule - The warn option gives you the opportunity to migrate your project seamlessly - The debug option allows support for debugging your config - Major updates for all dependencies Would love to see more and more people like nuxt.js, renovate and terser playing with this to bring more and more structure to their projects <3
- ls-lint just reached the 500 000 npm downloads - road to 1 million!
errcheck
-
Linter to check for errors ignored with _
In our codebase I noticed a few cases where people ignored errors returned from functions by assigning them to _, ie result, _ := foo(). The errcheck linter doesn't seem to catch this, does anyone know of a linter that does?
-
Golang panics in libraries
And we also expect that the caller will check the error and handle it. There is a popular linter that checks it for us: errcheck.
-
Is it a bad convention to overwrite err variable?
You should be using golangci-lint, because all serious Go programmers should. golangci-lint contains errcheck, which will detect if you overwrite an error without having done something with it in the meantime. I consider this one of the most important linters (this doesn't just detect things that may sorta kinda someday turn into bugs, this quite likely is a bug RIGHT NOW), and it helps you have the confidence you can overwrite errors as you go and don't need to keep allocating new ones.
-
Integration Tests failing
Run golangci-lint over your code if you haven't already and pay special attention to errcheck's output.
-
Luciano Remes | Golang is πΌπ‘π’π€π¨π© Perfect
errcheck has a flag for that ;)
-
Proposal: Go 2: Lightweight anonymous function syntax
https://github.com/kisielk/errcheck, which is in most of the combined linter packages by default.
We'll agree to disagree about unused imports; imports have can side-effects.
-
Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang
I prefer functions returning errors over throwing exceptions. Whether it's Go's errors or ML-style options/results, they're both better than exceptions. I cannot remember the last time I had a bug from not checking an error in Go. There's also errcheck which I use as part of my linting that will catch unchecked errors, such that I cannot even commit the code.
-
I Want Off Mr. Golang's Wild Ride
> Go compiler raise an error if a variable (error) goes unused
It doesn't though. It's perfectly valid to not use the return value of a function that only returns an error, for instance.
There are static error checking tools you can use like https://github.com/kisielk/errcheck to work around this, but most people don't use them.
I've run into a lack of Go error checking many times. Many times it's just the trivial case, where the compiler doesn't warn about not checking the result of an error-returning function.
But often it'll be subtler, and the result of Go's API design. One example is its file writing API, which requires you to close the file and check its error to be correct. Many times people will just `defer file.Close()`, but that isn't good enough - you're ignoring the error there.
Worse still is e.g: writing to a file through a bufio.Writer. To be correct, you need to remember to flush the writer, check that error, then close the file and check that error. There's no type-level support to make sure you do that.
-
Trying Out Generics in Go
I'd be really happy with that! Building the functionality of errcheck[1] and ineffassign[2] into the compiler β or at the very least, into govet β would go a long way to allay my worries with Go.
I think the reason they don't do this is that it's a slight (albeit a very tiny one) against Go's philosophy of errors being values, just like any other. While the `error` type is standard and used throughout Go source code, it still just has a simple three-line definition[3] and is not treated as a special case anywhere else; there is nothing stopping you from returning your own error type if you wish. A third-party linter could simply check for the `error` type specifically, but the first-party tools should not, and there's nothing like Rust's `#[must_use]` attribute that could be used instead. I respect Go's philosophy, but I feel like pragmatism must win in this case.
[1]: https://github.com/kisielk/errcheck
What are some alternatives?
golangci-lint - Fast linters Runner for Go
GoLint - [mirror] This is a linter for Go source code. (deprecated)
reviewdog - πΆ Automated code review tool integrated with any code analysis tools regardless of programming language
staticcheck
go-tools - Staticcheck - The advanced Go linter
gosimple
eslint-plugin-move-files - Move and rename files while keeping imports up to date
gcvis - Visualise Go program GC trace data in real time
terser - π JavaScript parser, mangler and compressor toolkit for ES6+
apicompat - apicompat checks recent changes to a Go project for backwards incompatible changes
renovate - Universal dependency automation tool.
Go Metalinter