Credo.Check format_issue can use a custom exit_status option

[rNoz]

What am I doing?

Being able to use a custom exit_status option.

Why?

When I try to pass a custom :exit_status value to the format_issue opts, it is never applied. Am I missing something?

format_issue(
  issue_meta,
  message: message,
  trigger: mfa,
  exit_status: 0,
  line_no: line_no
)
# exit status is not 0

The tricky thing is that I am defining a Check that could generate:

• 2 types of categories.
• 2 different exit statuses (0 and 16 - warning).

Alternative approaches

How am I bypassing this for now? I am developing a Credo.Check and I do it by modifying the IssueMeta tuple, setting these values, which is a bit "weird", compared with just giving a custom option when formatting it.

As :exit_status is not established when using it (use options), it gets it from the function generated by the macro.

  @doc false
  def exit_status(params, check_mod) do
    params[:__exit_status__] || params[:exit_status] || check_mod.exit_status()
  end

Example:

exit_status = 0 # or the other coming from :warning
issue_meta = case issue_meta do
  {mod, source, params} -> {mod, source, Keyword.put(params, :exit_status, exit_status)
  issue_meta -> issue_meta
end
    
format_issue(issue_meta, ...)

[rrrene]

@rNoz Thx for highlighting and fixing this. I found that :priority was also ignored: b9a76f1

This is remarkable, as this code hasn't been touched in 9 years. It was simply wrong the whole time 😳

[rNoz]

You are welcome, @rrrene. I have another proposal that will facilitate modifying the category directly via the format_issue. This will be really useful when having a Credo.Check that can produce a variety of categories/issues. Can I send a proposal to include it as another option?

[rrrene]

@rNoz I think that could be a good idea, but I would want to ask the question: Are there other attributes that we should be able to set through format_issue/2?

Another question to ask is: Why is a single check belonging to two categories in your case? We had cases in Credo where a single check was producing two kinds of issues and even in that case, we eventually split the check in two to have a clear 1:1 relationship. (this is just me being curious, not trying to patronize you)