Skip to content

Conversation

@willum070
Copy link
Collaborator

Change-Id: I1830c53d710fbc898ee7ce644d4dd68eab9ec524

Change-Id: I1830c53d710fbc898ee7ce644d4dd68eab9ec524
Copy link

@chrisjshull chrisjshull left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you want to do a pass against the current codebase?

Also, do you want to add a "test" that fails if prettier wants to make any changes?

@willum070
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Do you want to do a pass against the current codebase?

  • I'd like to get complete coverage, but I don't have the time to do it all at once. I think we can do it gradually.

Also, do you want to add a "test" that fails if prettier wants to make any changes?

  • I am intrigued, would this be another Playwright test? Because my guess is that Prettier will probably change anything it runs on at this point.

@chrisjshull
Copy link

On time: Sorry, wouldn’t it just be a matter of running prettier against the whole codebase?

on test: no, you’d add a prettier CLI https://prettier.io/docs/cli#--check call execution to where tests are otherwise executed

@willum070
Copy link
Collaborator Author

On time: Sorry, wouldn’t it just be a matter of running prettier against the whole codebase?
You're right, this should be relatively easy, so there is no reason to not do it.

on test: no, you’d add a prettier CLI https://prettier.io/docs/cli#--check call execution to where tests are otherwise executed
This is a good suggestion too, I will need a moment to work through it.

@willum070 willum070 closed this Oct 8, 2025
@willum070 willum070 deleted the prettier-config branch October 8, 2025 20:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants