You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 25, 2021. It is now read-only.
I am personally partial to example4, as it enforces the shortest lines, but different people may want to enforce different styles in their codebases. The important part is that we can enforce a consistent style.
So I'm proposing a new rule, maybe called function-parameter-style or something like that. And then we need to come up with names for the different styles that we can set, or maybe we just number them.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
samal-rasmussen
changed the title
Feature request: Function parameter linebreak and indentation style
Feature request: Add rule for enforcing function parameter linebreak and indentation style
Feb 28, 2018
I couldn't get what I wanted with the align parameters rule. The align parameters rule accepts all of my examples. I am proposing a rule that would only accept one of them.
Gotcha. In that case, since there's a lot of overlap, I'd recommend putting this new rule in a separate repository and linking to it here. TSLint's been moving away from investing in whitespace rules: #628.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Feature request
There are several different types of styles for handling linebreaks and indentation for funtion parameters. Here are a few I could come up with:
I am personally partial to example4, as it enforces the shortest lines, but different people may want to enforce different styles in their codebases. The important part is that we can enforce a consistent style.
So I'm proposing a new rule, maybe called function-parameter-style or something like that. And then we need to come up with names for the different styles that we can set, or maybe we just number them.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: