feat(linter): add a check for affected field #295
Conversation
hogo6002
force-pushed
the
affected_check
branch
from
d9c9d59
to
fcc82cf
Compare
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| var CheckAffectedFieldValid = &CheckDef{ | ||
| Code: "A0001", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(Over) thinking about codes, and prefixes, IMO, this is a record-level check, but I'm already using "R" for ranges...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I also feel I shouldn't name this file as affected.go?. record.go sounds better and can add more checks in the future.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I renamed the file to record.go and renamed the check to CheckRecordHasAffected, but i didn't change the code. I agree that this is a record-level check and "R" is better than "A". Should we rename the range code to "V" for versions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we rename the range code to "V" for versions?
Versions are one of the types of things in ranges :-)
Maybe for record-level, we go with the very non-obvious "O" for OSV? Naming is hard...
Signed-off-by: Holly Gong <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Holly Gong <[email protected]>
hogo6002
force-pushed
the
affected_check
branch
from
96a5a26
to
889b6bd
Compare
affected:should be defined in the data source and should not be an empty array.