Apart from the possibility of catching bugs, are there performance advantages in doing this?
I sometimes specify arguments even if they are not used, especially when refactoring code and adding new arguments that avoid the consumer fetching things in more exotic ways. Unless I update all consumers with the new argument, people are used to the previous signature and may not notice the change, then new exotic fetches are added. It's surely something that the review process should catch, but it's not a given. In the bug Gijs suggested supporting a _ prefix to keep arguments, will that be implemented? Are the 9000 cases covering all the cases of unused arguments, before and after used arguments? What will it replace unused arguments with, if they are before used ones? Thank you. On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 12:15 PM Dave Townsend <[email protected]> wrote: > We’re going to start throwing lint errors for unused function arguments. > This matches our existing behaviour of throwing errors for unused variables > within functions. Specifically we will be setting the arguments option for > eslint’s > no-unused-vars rule to after-used > <https://eslint.org/docs/latest/rules/no-unused-vars#args-after-used>. > > Unused arguments can be simply leftover after previous refactoring or can > be a sign of bugs where a function is expected to do something with the > argument and doesn’t. Either is a problem as it makes the function > signature misleading. > > This lint error won’t be automatically fixable. Automatically fixing is > problematic during development since if you have your IDE configured to > auto-fix whenever saving it removes arguments from functions you are in the > middle of writing. Removing the argument is not always the correct solution > either, it is better for the developer to choose the best solution. > > However we will be automatically fixing the over 9,000 existing > occurrences in the tree before turning the rule on. While it is possible we > may miss real bugs by doing this, those bugs are already present and it is > simply not feasible to turn this rule on otherwise. > > What we cannot do is warn about or fix callers that are passing too many > arguments to functions. That would require more advanced JavaScript tooling > than we have available in Mozilla code currently. > This work will be tracked in bug 1864896 > <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1864896>. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups " > [email protected]" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/firefox-dev/CAPMxTNrS%2BnhxhGuR7sxm6-_Ve_ofS%3D1GZvp_fmPGY3K7u6wcWQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/firefox-dev/CAPMxTNrS%2BnhxhGuR7sxm6-_Ve_ofS%3D1GZvp_fmPGY3K7u6wcWQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "[email protected]" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-platform/CAPDqYT2HO8rC7%3DyRXvqamc1RGndaxMrNRmcZJu%2B-_pkO%2Bek%2BbA%40mail.gmail.com.
