-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
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.
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
tools: avoid using process.cwd in tools/lint-js #17121
Conversation
The first occurrence of path.join() can easily be replaced with path.resolve(). The second occurrence should be unnecessary as ESLint will resolve the path internally, and the old check probably did not work as intended anyway.
@tniessen Would you mind kicking off CI when you add that label? :) |
@addaleax I kicked off CI before creating the PR, the link is in the description. Unless, of course, |
@tniessen Ah – Yeah, I didn’t see that because it didn’t show up in the github display here, but that makes sense if you used node-test-commit directly 👍 |
Landed in f82f5a4. |
The first occurrence of path.join() can easily be replaced with path.resolve(). The second occurrence should be unnecessary as ESLint will resolve the path internally, and the old check probably did not work as intended anyway. PR-URL: #17121 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
The first occurrence of path.join() can easily be replaced with path.resolve(). The second occurrence should be unnecessary as ESLint will resolve the path internally, and the old check probably did not work as intended anyway. PR-URL: #17121 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
The first occurrence of path.join() can easily be replaced with path.resolve(). The second occurrence should be unnecessary as ESLint will resolve the path internally, and the old check probably did not work as intended anyway. PR-URL: #17121 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
The first occurrence of path.join() can easily be replaced with path.resolve(). The second occurrence should be unnecessary as ESLint will resolve the path internally, and the old check probably did not work as intended anyway. PR-URL: #17121 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
The first occurrence of path.join() can easily be replaced with path.resolve(). The second occurrence should be unnecessary as ESLint will resolve the path internally, and the old check probably did not work as intended anyway. PR-URL: #17121 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
The first occurrence of
path.join()
can be replaced withpath.resolve()
. The second occurrence should be unnecessary as ESLint will resolve the path internally, and the old check probably did not work as intended anyway.CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-linter/13675/
Checklist
make -j4 test
(UNIX), orvcbuild test
(Windows) passesAffected core subsystem(s)
tools