Refactor RuboCop requests with separate runners #183
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Morriar
approved these changes
Jul 5, 2022
This was referenced Jul 5, 2022
andyw8
pushed a commit
to andyw8/ruby-lsp
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 2, 2024
…sbuild-0.14.54 Bump esbuild from 0.14.51 to 0.14.54
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
Closes #136
This is basically another attempt at the same refactor.
Implementation
In this attempt, I have separated two singleton RuboCop runners - one for formatting and one for diagnostics. The requests now inherit from
BaseRequest, like all others.This structure will allow us to check for the presence of RuboCop in the application and then decide whether to have diagnostics and formatting - which also enables falling back to SyntaxTree formatting.