-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
Support remapping all severity levels #138
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
Conversation
- print messages when using FSC args, too - support remapping of all severity levels
src/FSharp.Analyzers.Cli/Program.fs
Outdated
| Report of string | ||
| FSC_Args of string | ||
| Verbose | ||
| [<Unique>] Project of string list |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
does Unique
require only a single instance of each of these flags? It's often nicer/easier for users (especially automated scripts!) to specify the same flag multiple times, aggregating all of the values of each time the flag is provided.
> app --project myproject.fsproj --project anotherproject.fsproj
is the same as
> app --project myproject.fsproj,anotherproject.fsproj
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay, that's supported now. I did the same for --analyzers-path
as it felt somewhat related to proj paths.
I'm not sure about the other ones.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks good. But I'm a little lost by the --project
changes.
src/FSharp.Analyzers.Cli/Program.fs
Outdated
|
||
if not (severityMapping.IsValid()) then | ||
printError | ||
"An analyzer code may only be listed once in the <fail-on-warnings> and <treat-as-severity> arguments." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is a bit questionable.
Fail On Warnings
feels like the ugly duck. Is this not, in concept, replaced by TreatAsError
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.