Change Request: `"rule_name": "disable"` combine with `reportUnusedDisableDirectives`

[loynoir]

Change Request: `"rule_name": "disable"` combine with `reportUnusedDisableDirectives`

[nzakas]

Thanks for the suggestion. I'm having trouble understanding the problem you're trying to solve and also how what you're proposing would help. Please describe the problem in more detail.

[loynoir]

Given config

    linterOptions: {
      reportUnusedDisableDirectives: 'error'
    }

Below code will report error, when code does not violate xxx1 to xxx5.

/* eslint-disable xxx1 */
/* eslint-disable xxx2 */
/* eslint-disable xxx3 */
/* eslint-disable xxx4 */
/* eslint-disable xxx5 */

code

But this makes code ugly.

I prefer

    rules: {
      'xxx1': 'off',
      'xxx2': 'off',
      'xxx3': 'off',
      'xxx4': 'off',
      'xxx5': 'off',
    },
    linterOptions: {
      reportUnusedDisableDirectives: 'error'
    }

But the problem is, when code don't violate rule xxx1 to xxx5, I expect eslint to report disable rules are unused.

So, I propose a new value disable.

Before proposal, available values are 'error' | 'off' | 'warn'.

After proposal, available values are 'error' | 'off' | 'warn' | 'disable'.

Value 'xxx1': 'disable'

• is treated as same as /* eslint-disable xxx1 */, but let code looks less ugly.

• is better than 'xxx1': 'off', because it is reported when code does not violate rule xxx1.

    rules: {
      'xxx1': 'disable',
      'xxx2': 'disable',
      'xxx3': 'disable',
      'xxx4': 'disable',
      'xxx5': 'disable',
    },
    linterOptions: {
      reportUnusedDisableDirectives: 'error'
    }

[nzakas]

But the problem is, when code don't violate rule xxx1 to xxx5, I expect eslint to report disable rules are unused.

Just to make sure I understand: you're saying that you want a way to say that a rule (xxx1) that is set to "off" can be removed because it would not cause any errors?

[loynoir]

Just to make sure I understand: you're saying that you want a way to say that a rule (xxx1) that is set to "off" can be removed because it would not cause any errors?

Yes.

But also consider the fact of the plugin ecosystem

    "no-unused-vars": "off",
    "@typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars": "error"

I propose a rule (xxx1) that is set to "disable" can be removed because it would not cause any errors.

[nzakas]

Okay, thanks for confirming.

I'm not sure what you're proposing makes sense. If the rule is set to "disable", we would actually still need to execute the rule to determine if it produced any errors, which incurs a performance cost. So it's not actually disabled at all. The only difference is that when the rule does not report errors, that itself would be reported as an unused rule.

The confusion between "disable" and "off" would also be a key concern. I understand you're proposing "disable" so that it would still be reported by "reportUnusedDisableDirectives", but I think overall this is confusing.

So, I don't think the proposal as stated is something we want to implement.

This seems targeted at an edge case, and it's pretty easy to tell if a rule would result in an error by temporarily turning it on.

At this point, we're not going to pursue implementing such a change.

[eslint-github-bot]

It looks like there wasn't enough information for us to know how to help you, so we're closing the issue.

Thanks for your understanding.