chore: bump biome formatter to next major & reformat #4145
Conversation
boring-cyborg
bot
added
automation
|
| @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ describe('Logger E2E - Advanced uses', () => { | |||
| try { | |||
| JSON.parse(log); | |||
| return true; | |||
| } catch (error) { | |||
| } catch (_error) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How come this isn't just using a bare catch like the others?
} catch {
return false;
}| @@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ describe('Schema: Kinesis', () => { | |||
|
|
|||
| const transformedInput = { | |||
| ...testEvent, | |||
| Records: testEvent.Records.map((record, index) => { | |||
| Records: testEvent.Records.map((record, _index) => { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why include index at all here, testEvent.Records.map((record) => { would suffice.
| @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ | |||
| module.exports = async ({github, context, core}) => { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not for this PR but at some point we should move these scripts to user ESM rather than CommonJS.
| @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ app.tool<{ city: string }>( | |||
| async ({ city }, { event }) => { | |||
| try { | |||
| throw new Error('Simulated error for demonstration purposes'); | |||
| } catch (error) { | |||
| } catch (_error) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As mentioned, is there a reaosn we're not doing } catch { like we are in other places in the code? Same for all the other instances of this pattern in this commit (1f780c5).
Thanks for this, made reviewing the changes much easier. |
Summary
Changes
This PR manually bumps
@biomejs/biometo the latest version (2.x) which constitutes a major release upgrade for us since we were stuck at1.x.The upgrade introduces a couple new rules that are a good thing for the project, but that required some manual attention. The changes focus almost exclusively on import sorting and unused variables.
Since the PR diff is very big, I tried to address each package in a dedicated commit and I suggest reviewers to use the dropdown at the top-left of the PR view to select the commits while reviewing to limit the number of files.
Aside from that, apologies in advance for the big PR, splitting the work in multiple PRs would've required changes to the CI to support both versions at the same time and it wasn't worth it.
I also don't expect reviewers to look at every single file, but rather get a gist of the changes and review it as a whole, knowing that the tests are still passing.
Issue number: closes #4144
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.
Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.