Rule Request: Prefer implicit member expression
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
rule-request
- Dominant language
- Swift
- Stars
- 19.7k
- Forks
- 2.3k
- Avg merge
- 1d 1h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 11
Description
New Issue Checklist
- Updated SwiftLint to the latest version
- I searched for existing GitHub issues
New rule request
- Why should this rule be added? Share links to existing discussion about what
the community thinks about this.
Implicit member expressions make code nicer without much loss of readability.
- Provide several examples of what would and wouldn't trigger violations.
Would trigger:
foo.color = NSColor.white
bar.color = NSColor.white.withAlphaComponent(0.5) // Swift 5.4
Would not trigger:
foo.color = .white
bar.color = .white.withAlphaComponent(0.5) // Swift 5.4
- Should the rule be configurable, if so what parameters should be configurable?
No
- Should the rule be opt-in or enabled by default? Why?
See README.md for guidelines on when to mark a rule as opt-in.
Up to you. I manually enable the rules I want.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with README.md, particularly the opt-in rules section, and review how SwiftLint’s existing rules are organized. Use the provided Swift examples to define the behavior: explicit member expressions should be flagged while already-implicit expressions should remain valid. Done means the rule’s default status is decided and its behavior is covered for both triggering and non-triggering examples.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- swift
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100