-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
Create tool for linting Arduino projects #1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
6434353
to
8b5a200
Compare
I watched the whole PR and left lots of comments but I must have missed something for sure. |
12c0dbc
to
35115a2
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🚀
Thanks so much. Great suggestions!
I have run
There was definitely a lot of unnecessary use of |
- Put type in dedicated package to create a namespace for it - Name custom type "Type" (the package name provides the identification)
Checks should always be explicitly configured to run or not run in any check mode.
I made a dedicated function for this purpose, then forgot to use it!
This information is not normally of interest.
When a report file path is specified by the user, a JSON formatted report of the checks will be written to that path.
Since the variables already contain the value that needs to be returned, the if statement only adds unnecessary verbosity.
This would indicate a new project type was added to the tool without updating the subproject discovery code accordingly.
Previously, the more general project filter type was used, but the specific project type that was detected will be more useful information.
The term "project type" is used both to refer to the type of the project filter, which may be "all", and to the specific project type (e.g., sketch, library, platform). This can result in some ambiguity in the code. The use of "filter" in variable names that are used exclusively for project type filters may make the code easier to follow.
Consolidate the redundant logging code in these functions.
Previously, there was no provision for multiple report instances. Although the current tool design has no need for multiple instances, the code now has the versatility to allow for report demands that might arise in the future.
The change in approach in the result package resulted in some of the use of the term "report" in that package becoming less intuitive, since reports are only one use of the results.
No description provided.