Fix: improve diagnostics for shareable-config-missing errors #11880
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What is the purpose of this pull request? (put an "X" next to item)
[x] Bug fix
Tell us about your environment
What parser (default, Babel-ESLint, etc.) are you using?
default
Please show your full configuration:
Configuration
What did you do? Please include the actual source code causing the issue.
(Any source code)
What did you expect to happen?
I expected to get an error message saying that
nonexistent-config
doesn't exist, with a useful indicator for which config was trying to loadnonexistent-config
.What actually happened? Please include the actual, raw output from ESLint.
I got the following error message:
ESLint couldn't find the config "nonexistent-config" to extend from. Please check that the name of the config is correct.
This error message makes it difficult to debug the problem if I'm not sure who is trying to load a given missing config.
What changes did you make? (Give an overview)
This updates the missing-shareable-config error message to include more useful diagnostic information about the problem, by mentioning which config tried to load the nonexistent config.
Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?
I'm labelling this as a "bug" because the fix wouldn't have any semver impact (even if reverted), but feel free to comment if you disagree with this categorization.