Hacktoberfest 2026: le issue che i maintainer hanno segnato per ottobre, aperte e adatte ai principianti. Sfoglia le issue Hacktoberfest

no-ad-hoc-jsonl-parser: isLineSource doesn't traverse ConditionalExpression, missing live ad-hoc parse in conclusion_admission.c

Aperta Adatta ai principianti
  • Qualcosa non va?
#71,028 0 commenti 0 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Valutazione

Difficoltà
2/5
Tempo stimato
1-3 ore
Idoneità per principianti
75/100
Tipo di issue
Bug
Chiarezza
Specificata chiaramente
Stato di attività
Attiva
Stack tecnologico
eslint, github-actions, typescript
Ambito
tooling

Direzione di ricerca

Inizia da eslint-factory/src/rules/no-ad-hoc-jsonl-parser.ts e dai relativi test in no-ad-hoc-jsonl-parser.test.ts; segui come isLineSource() e fromLine() risolvono le espressioni condizionali. Aggiungi i casi sintetici validi e non validi descritti nell’issue, quindi esegui i test della regola e controlla actions/setup/js/conclusion_admission.cjs con la regola. Il risultato atteso è che il caso di divisione tramite ternario venga segnalato, mentre gli array di documenti non correlati non vengano segnalati.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

cookie eslint
Summary

no-ad-hoc-jsonl-parser's isLineSource() helper (eslint-factory/src/rules/no-ad-hoc-jsonl-parser.ts:76-98) only resolves a variable's "line-ness" through one hop of identifier-to-initializer resolution (Identifier → initializer()) and through a small whitelist of chained CallExpression methods (split, filter, slice, reverse, toReversed). It never unwraps a ConditionalExpression (ternary) to check whether either branch is itself a line source. Any line array built behind a ternary — a very ordinary "empty vs. split" guard — escapes detection entirely, including when it is subsequently JSON.parse'd per-element, which is exactly the ad-hoc-parsing idiom this rule exists to catch.

Live, grounded false negative

actions/setup/js/conclusion_admission.cjs:50-54:

const lines = compact.session === "" ? [] : compact.session.split("\n");
if (lines.at(-1) === "") lines.pop();
if ((!compact.session.endsWith("\n") && compact.session !== "") || lines.length !== compact.included_events) throw new AdmissionError();
try {
  const projected = compactUnifiedSession(lines.map(line => JSON.parse(line)));

This is a manual split-by-newline followed by .map(line => JSON.parse(line)) — the canonical pattern the rule is designed to flag (compare to the rule's own invalid test case const lines = text.split((r/redacted)?\n/); ... JSON.parse(line)). It is not wrapped by iterateJsonl/iterateJsonlEvents/JsonlParser from jsonl_helpers.cjs, yet the rule produces zero diagnostic here.

Root cause

Tracing lines in isLineSource():

  1. lines is an Identifier → initializer(node) returns its VariableDeclarator init, which is the ConditionalExpression compact.session === "" ? [] : compact.session.split("\n").
  2. isLineSource(conditionalExpr) hits if (node.type !== "CallExpression") return false; (line 83) immediately, since ConditionalExpression is neither Identifier nor CallExpression.
  3. Because isLineSource(lines) is false, the CallExpression visitor's lineArray check for lines.map(...) (arrayCallbacks.has("map") && isLineSource(node.callee.object)) never marks line as a line binding, so the later JSON.parse(line) inside the map callback is never reported.

The same gap applies to fromLine() (used for the Program:exit cross-call propagation pass), which also only descends through Identifier/ArrayExpression/MemberExpression(computed)/a small CallExpression method whitelist — no ConditionalExpression handling there either.

Proposed fix

In isLineSource() (and ideally the equivalent place in fromLine()), add a branch: if (node.type === "ConditionalExpression") return isLineSource(node.consequent, seen) || isLineSource(node.alternate, seen);. This directly fixes the cond ? [] : x.split("\n") idiom; an empty-array consequent is harmless since an empty array can't ever actually be the source of a flagged JSON.parse call.

Acceptance criteria
  • isLineSource() recognizes a ConditionalExpression as a line source when at least one branch resolves to a line source (via recursive isLineSource on consequent/alternate).
  • New invalid test case reproducing the live shape: const lines = cond ? [] : text.split("\n"); lines.map(line => JSON.parse(line)); must report adHoc.
  • A valid-case test confirms a ConditionalExpression where neither branch is a line source (e.g. cond ? documents : otherDocuments) is still not flagged.
  • conclusion_admission.cjs:54 is verified to now be caught after the fix (run against the real file, not just the synthetic test).
  • No existing passing test in no-ad-hoc-jsonl-parser.test.ts regresses.
Scope note

Out of scope for this issue: fixing conclusion_admission.cjs itself (app code, not rule code) — this is purely about closing the detection gap in the ESLint rule so a future regression or similar idiom elsewhere is caught.

Generated by 🤖 ESLint Refiner · claude · agent · 99.9 AIC · ⌖ 0.868 AIC · ⊞ 6K · ◷
Work 6b99120dce1d760d9b16b2c32e2b3939143961ca50ff5820849e9da583d8e97f · Claim c_2d1370e23519794ff88ba3c5ce7e17ee202e9a6904e679f8ad827e073d503dae_3

  • expires on Oct 28, 2026, 8:03 PM UTC-08:00
Lingua principale
Go
Stelle
5.4k
Fork
596
Merge medio
3h 40m
PR unite (30g)
830

Preparare l'ambiente

Apri in Codespaces

Avvia il container di sviluppo del progetto nel browser, con il tuo account GitHub.

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di github/gh-aw

Tutte le issue di github/gh-aw

Issue simili

Altre issue su Go

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.