Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Remove the no-new rule #2

Closed
jonaskello opened this issue Dec 12, 2016 · 5 comments
Closed

Remove the no-new rule #2

jonaskello opened this issue Dec 12, 2016 · 5 comments
Labels
breaking change

Comments

@jonaskello
Copy link
Owner

jonaskello commented Dec 12, 2016 •
edited
Loading

For some built-in types like RegExp, Map, Set, there is no way around using the new keyword. Maybe there should be an option to skip those cases.
@jonaskello
Copy link
Owner Author

Consider removing the no-new rule. The no-this rule may be enough?

@jonaskello
Copy link
Owner Author

Another way would be to consolidate no-class, no-new, and no-this to one rule, no-class with options for ignore-this and ignore-new.

@jonaskello
Copy link
Owner Author

Or we could remove the no-new rule as it will stop you from using classes defined in external libraries. I think the goal should be to stop you from declaring your own classes.

@jonaskello jonaskello changed the title no-new option to skip RegExp Remove the no-new rule May 14, 2017
@jonaskello
Copy link
Owner Author

Added notice in v3.4.2 about removing this rule in 4.0.

@jonaskello
Copy link
Owner Author

Fixed in 4.0.0

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
breaking change
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@jonaskello