Skip to content
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

H-2457: Improved ESLint configuration #4232

Draft
wants to merge 35 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

H-2457: Improved ESLint configuration #4232

wants to merge 35 commits into from

Conversation

indietyp
Copy link
Member

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

This PR adds a new ESLint configuration, which is more encompassing and stricter than the previous one.

Instead of trying to roll our own completely, needing to figure out which plugins to use and where I opted for an alternative method.

Instead of creating one from scratch, one uses an existing configuration and applies the necessary changes.

The big contenders currently around after some research are:

  • xo (I have previous experience with this one)
  • sheriff
  • hardcore

While hardcore looked promising, it does not yet expose the flat config configuration.
The main problem with xo is that it is exposed through an alternative binary, making it unsuitable to use in, e.g., WebStorm. It also, by default, lints stylistic choices covered by prettier.

sheriff instead fully embraces ESLint flat configs, is highly configurable, and has an excellent webpage detailing all the configurations used.

This PR will be split into multiple, as some changes won't be immediately visible. This PR only changes the configuration, introducing a package @repo/eslint (name TBD). A follow-up PR then applies the changes to all packages.

Because styling is always very subjective, we can preview the changes without polluting this PR. Some stylistic changes may be contentious and need further discussion (for example: react/jsx-curly-brace-presence). I have already adjusted several rules, to improve it to our needs, enabling some additional ones or removing them.

I would also suggest that once in a semi-stable state one targets this PR with their new changes, so that we can test developer experience.

(I have linted my package in here, and found it quite an improvement)

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

  • does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

  • are internal and do not require a docs change

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

  • affected the execution graph, and the turbo.json's have been updated to reflect this

@github-actions github-actions bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/apps > hash* Affects HASH (a `hash-*` app) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) type/eng > frontend Owned by the @frontend team area/apps labels Mar 24, 2024
@TimDiekmann TimDiekmann changed the title Improved ESLint configuration H-2457: Improved ESLint configuration Mar 24, 2024
# Conflicts:
#	apps/hash-ai-worker-ts/package.json
#	apps/hash-integration-worker/package.json
#	libs/@blockprotocol/graph/package.json
#	libs/@local/hash-backend-utils/package.json
#	libs/@local/hash-graph-client/typescript/package.json
#	libs/@local/hash-graph-sdk/typescript/package.json
#	libs/@local/hash-graph-types/typescript/package.json
#	libs/@local/hash-subgraph/.eslintrc.cjs
#	libs/@local/status/typescript/.eslintrc.cjs
#	libs/@local/status/typescript/package.json
#	yarn.lock
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) label Jul 19, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/infra > docker type/legal Owned by the @legal team area/apps > hash.design Affects the `hash.design` design site (app) labels Jul 19, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 19, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 18.25%. Comparing base (2e13a29) to head (ab1ee49).
Report is 544 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #4232   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   18.24%   18.25%           
=======================================
  Files         482      482           
  Lines       16041    16038    -3     
  Branches     2452     2449    -3     
=======================================
  Hits         2927     2927           
+ Misses      13076    13073    -3     
  Partials       38       38           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

Benchmark results

@rust/graph-benches – Integrations

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
link_by_source_by_property depths: DT=255, PT=255, ET=255, E=255 $$1.94 \mathrm{s} \pm 10.4 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-3.601 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property depths: DT=0, PT=2, ET=2, E=2 $$1.01 \mathrm{s} \pm 8.22 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-3.593 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property depths: DT=2, PT=2, ET=2, E=2 $$1.01 \mathrm{s} \pm 4.38 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-1.579 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=0, E=0 $$37.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 241 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.284 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=2, E=2 $$391 \mathrm{ms} \pm 2.12 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.811 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
link_by_source_by_property depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=0, E=2 $$72.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 301 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.712 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_property depths: DT=255, PT=255, ET=255, E=255 $$2.83 \mathrm{s} \pm 11.8 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-3.106 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_property depths: DT=0, PT=2, ET=2, E=2 $$951 \mathrm{ms} \pm 4.09 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.652 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_property depths: DT=2, PT=2, ET=2, E=2 $$958 \mathrm{ms} \pm 2.91 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.981 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_property depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=0, E=0 $$35.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 198 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.721 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_property depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=2, E=2 $$360 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.29 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-3.391 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_property depths: DT=0, PT=0, ET=0, E=2 $$39.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 224 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.519 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

scaling_read_entity_linkless

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id 100 entities $$2.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 4.65 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.596 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10 entities $$1.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.768 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1 entities $$1.82 \mathrm{ms} \pm 5.27 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1000 entities $$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10000 entities $$12.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 134 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.572 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id Account ID: d4e16033-c281-4cde-aa35-9085bf2e7579 $$1.39 \mathrm{ms} \pm 4.77 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.674 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

scaling_read_entity_complete_one_depth

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id 25 entities $$76.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 435 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 5 entities $$24.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 136 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 50 entities $$1.53 \mathrm{s} \pm 3.27 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-0.002 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10 entities $$50.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 248 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1 entities $$19.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.460 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

scaling_read_entity_complete_zero_depth

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id 25 entities $$2.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 5 entities $$1.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 7.28 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 50 entities $$3.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 10 entities $$2.00 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.39 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.719 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id 1 entities $$1.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.94 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function Value Mean Flame graphs
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1 $$15.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 192 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.35 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2 $$15.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 192 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.446 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1 $$15.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 172 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.897 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1 $$15.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 168 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.131 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1 $$15.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 170 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-34.591 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1 $$15.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 190 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1 $$15.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 178 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.497 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1 $$15.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 193 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.091 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph
entity_by_id entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1 $$16.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 172 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$ Flame Graph

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/apps > hash.design Affects the `hash.design` design site (app) area/apps > hash.dev Affects the `hash.dev` developer site (app) area/apps > hash* Affects HASH (a `hash-*` app) area/apps > hash-api Affects the HASH API (app) area/apps > hash-graph area/apps > hash-realtime area/apps > hash-search-loader area/apps area/blocks Relates to first-party blocks (area) area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/infra > docker area/infra Relates to version control, CI, CD or IaC (area) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) area/tests > integration New or updated integration tests area/tests > playwright New or updated Playwright tests area/tests New or updated tests priority/2 medium Medium priority: needs to be done type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team type/eng > frontend Owned by the @frontend team type/legal Owned by the @legal team
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants