chore(eslint-plugin): use correct type for return type of createValidator
#11721
Conversation
|
Thanks for the PR, @ulrichstark! typescript-eslint is a 100% community driven project, and we are incredibly grateful that you are contributing to that community. The core maintainers work on this in their personal time, so please understand that it may not be possible for them to review your work immediately. Thanks again! 🙏 Please, if you or your company is finding typescript-eslint valuable, help us sustain the project by sponsoring it transparently on https://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint. |
✅ Deploy Preview for typescript-eslint ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
|
| Command | Status | Duration | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
nx run integration-tests:test |
❌ Failed | 52s | View ↗ |
nx test eslint-plugin --coverage=false |
✅ Succeeded | 4m 58s | View ↗ |
nx run-many -t lint |
✅ Succeeded | 3m 4s | View ↗ |
nx run-many -t typecheck |
✅ Succeeded | 2m 8s | View ↗ |
nx test eslint-plugin-internal --coverage=false |
✅ Succeeded | 5s | View ↗ |
nx test typescript-estree --coverage=false |
✅ Succeeded | 2s | View ↗ |
nx run types:build |
✅ Succeeded | 6s | View ↗ |
nx run generate-configs |
✅ Succeeded | 8s | View ↗ |
Additional runs (29) |
✅ Succeeded | ... | View ↗ |
☁️ Nx Cloud last updated this comment at 2025-10-25 22:45:15 UTC
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #11721 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.66% 90.66% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 518 518
Lines 52415 52412 -3
Branches 8678 8678
==========================================
- Hits 47521 47518 -3
Misses 4880 4880
Partials 14 14
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
createValidatorcreateValidator
ea2ee6b
into
typescript-eslint:main
PR Checklist
Overview
While working on #11720, I noticed that the return type of the function is typed as a callback with one parameter, but is actually returning a callback with two parameters. It's now using the correct type and simultaneously with five lines less code.