Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.

Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.

Example

Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:

def double_thing()
  @other.thing + @other.thing
end

One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:

def double_thing()
  thing = @other.thing
  thing + thing
end

A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing by calls to @other.double_thing:

class Other
  def double_thing()
    thing + thing
  end
end

The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.

Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.

Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.

Example

Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:

def double_thing()
  @other.thing + @other.thing
end

One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:

def double_thing()
  thing = @other.thing
  thing + thing
end

A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing by calls to @other.double_thing:

class Other
  def double_thing()
    thing + thing
  end
end

The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.

Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.

Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.

Example

Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:

def double_thing()
  @other.thing + @other.thing
end

One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:

def double_thing()
  thing = @other.thing
  thing + thing
end

A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing by calls to @other.double_thing:

class Other
  def double_thing()
    thing + thing
  end
end

The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.

Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.

Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.

Example

Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:

def double_thing()
  @other.thing + @other.thing
end

One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:

def double_thing()
  thing = @other.thing
  thing + thing
end

A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing by calls to @other.double_thing:

class Other
  def double_thing()
    thing + thing
  end
end

The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.

Cross-site scripting (or XSS) is #3 on the 2013 [OWASP Top Ten](https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10_2013-A3-Cross-Site_Scripting_(XSS\)) web security risks and it pops up nearly everywhere.

XSS occurs when a user-controlled value is displayed on a web page without properly escaping it, allowing someone to inject Javascript or HTML into the page which will be interpreted and executed by the browser..

In Rails 2.x, values need to be explicitly escaped (e.g., by using the h method). Since Rails 3.x, auto-escaping in views is enabled by default. However, one can still use the raw or html_safe methods to output a value directly.

See the Ruby Security Guide for more details.

Query Parameters and Cookies

ERB example:

<%= params[:query].html_safe %>

Brakeman looks for several situations that can allow XSS. The simplest is like the example above: a value from the params or cookies is being directly output to a view. In such cases, it will issue a warning like:

Unescaped parameter value near line 3: params[:query]

By default, Brakeman will also warn when a parameter or cookie value is used as an argument to a method, the result of which is output unescaped to a view.

For example:

<%= raw some_method(cookie[:name]) %>

This raises a warning like:

Unescaped cookie value near line 5: some_method(cookies[:oreo])

However, the confidence level for this warning will be weak, because it is not directly outputting the cookie value.

Some methods are known to Brakeman to either be dangerous (link_to is one) or safe (escape_once). Users can specify safe methods using the --safe-methods option. Alternatively, Brakeman can be set to only warn when values are used directly with the --report-direct option.

Model Attributes

Because (many) models come from database values, Brakeman mistrusts them by default.

For example, if @user is an instance of a model set in an action like

def set_user
  @user = User.first
end

and there is a view with

<%= @user.name.html_safe %>

Brakeman will raise a warning like

Unescaped model attribute near line 3: User.first.name

If you trust all your data (although you probably shouldn't), this can be disabled with --ignore-model-output.

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 31.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 31.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

Cognitive Complexity

Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

• Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
• Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
• Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"

Further reading

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

Cognitive Complexity

Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

• Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
• Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
• Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"

Further reading

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

A Utility Function is any instance method that has no dependency on the state of the instance.

An Uncommunicative Variable Name is a variable name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

An Uncommunicative Variable Name is a variable name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

An Uncommunicative Variable Name is a variable name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

require or disallow trailing commas (comma-dangle)

Trailing commas in object literals are valid according to the ECMAScript 5 (and ECMAScript 3!) spec. However, IE8 (when not in IE8 document mode) and below will throw an error when it encounters trailing commas in JavaScript.

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

Trailing commas simplify adding and removing items to objects and arrays, since only the lines you are modifying must be touched. Another argument in favor of trailing commas is that it improves the clarity of diffs when an item is added or removed from an object or array:

Less clear:

var foo = {
-    bar: "baz",
-    qux: "quux"
+    bar: "baz"
 };

More clear:

var foo = {
     bar: "baz",
-    qux: "quux",
 };

Rule Details

This rule enforces consistent use of trailing commas in object and array literals.

Options

This rule has a string option or an object option:

{
    "comma-dangle": ["error", "never"],
    // or
    "comma-dangle": ["error", {
        "arrays": "never",
        "objects": "never",
        "imports": "never",
        "exports": "never",
        "functions": "ignore",
    }]
}

• "never" (default) disallows trailing commas
• "always" requires trailing commas
• "always-multiline" requires trailing commas when the last element or property is in a different line than the closing ] or } and disallows trailing commas when the last element or property is on the same line as the closing ] or }
• "only-multiline" allows (but does not require) trailing commas when the last element or property is in a different line than the closing ] or } and disallows trailing commas when the last element or property is on the same line as the closing ] or }

Trailing commas in function declarations and function calls are valid syntax since ECMAScript 2017; however, the string option does not check these situations for backwards compatibility.

You can also use an object option to configure this rule for each type of syntax. Each of the following options can be set to "never", "always", "always-multiline", "only-multiline", or "ignore". The default for each option is "never" unless otherwise specified.

• arrays is for array literals and array patterns of destructuring. (e.g. let [a,] = [1,];)
• objects is for object literals and object patterns of destructuring. (e.g. let {a,} = {a: 1};)
• imports is for import declarations of ES Modules. (e.g. import {a,} from "foo";)
• exports is for export declarations of ES Modules. (e.g. export {a,};)
• functions is for function declarations and function calls. (e.g. (function(a,){ })(b,);)
  functions is set to "ignore" by default for consistency with the string option.

never

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the default "never" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "never"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

var arr = [1,2,];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux",
});

Examples of correct code for this rule with the default "never" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "never"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux"
};

var arr = [1,2];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux"
});

always

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "always" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "always"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux"
};

var arr = [1,2];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux"
});

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "always" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "always"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

var arr = [1,2,];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux",
});

always-multiline

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "always-multiline" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "always-multiline"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux"
};

var foo = { bar: "baz", qux: "quux", };

var arr = [1,2,];

var arr = [1,
    2,];

var arr = [
    1,
    2
];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux"
});

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "always-multiline" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "always-multiline"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

var foo = {bar: "baz", qux: "quux"};
var arr = [1,2];

var arr = [1,
    2];

var arr = [
    1,
    2,
];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux",
});

only-multiline

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "only-multiline" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "only-multiline"]*/

var foo = { bar: "baz", qux: "quux", };

var arr = [1,2,];

var arr = [1,
    2,];

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "only-multiline" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "only-multiline"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux"
};

var foo = {bar: "baz", qux: "quux"};
var arr = [1,2];

var arr = [1,
    2];

var arr = [
    1,
    2,
];

var arr = [
    1,
    2
];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux",
});

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux"
});

functions

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the {"functions": "never"} option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", {"functions": "never"}]*/

function foo(a, b,) {
}

foo(a, b,);
new foo(a, b,);

Examples of correct code for this rule with the {"functions": "never"} option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", {"functions": "never"}]*/

function foo(a, b) {
}

foo(a, b);
new foo(a, b);

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the {"functions": "always"} option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", {"functions": "always"}]*/

function foo(a, b) {
}

foo(a, b);
new foo(a, b);

Examples of correct code for this rule with the {"functions": "always"} option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", {"functions": "always"}]*/

function foo(a, b,) {
}

foo(a, b,);
new foo(a, b,);

When Not To Use It

You can turn this rule off if you are not concerned with dangling commas. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

require let or const instead of var (no-var)

ECMAScript 6 allows programmers to create variables with block scope instead of function scope using the let and const keywords. Block scope is common in many other programming languages and helps programmers avoid mistakes such as:

var count = people.length;
var enoughFood = count > sandwiches.length;

if (enoughFood) {
    var count = sandwiches.length; // accidentally overriding the count variable
    console.log("We have " + count + " sandwiches for everyone. Plenty for all!");
}

// our count variable is no longer accurate
console.log("We have " + count + " people and " + sandwiches.length + " sandwiches!");

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at discouraging the use of var and encouraging the use of const or let instead.

Examples

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-var: "error"*/

var x = "y";
var CONFIG = {};

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-var: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

let x = "y";
const CONFIG = {};

When Not To Use It

In addition to non-ES6 environments, existing JavaScript projects that are beginning to introduce ES6 into their codebase may not want to apply this rule if the cost of migrating from var to let is too costly. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Require Object Literal Shorthand Syntax (object-shorthand)

EcmaScript 6 provides a concise form for defining object literal methods and properties. This syntax can make defining complex object literals much cleaner.

Here are a few common examples using the ES5 syntax:

// properties
var foo = {
    x: x,
    y: y,
    z: z,
};

// methods
var foo = {
    a: function() {},
    b: function() {}
};

Now here are ES6 equivalents:

/*eslint-env es6*/

// properties
var foo = {x, y, z};

// methods
var foo = {
    a() {},
    b() {}
};

Rule Details

This rule enforces the use of the shorthand syntax. This applies to all methods (including generators) defined in object literals and any properties defined where the key name matches name of the assigned variable.

Each of the following properties would warn:

/*eslint object-shorthand: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
    w: function() {},
    x: function *() {},
    [y]: function() {},
    z: z
};

In that case the expected syntax would have been:

/*eslint object-shorthand: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
    w() {},
    *x() {},
    [y]() {},
    z
};

This rule does not flag arrow functions inside of object literals. The following will not warn:

/*eslint object-shorthand: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
    x: (y) => y
};

Options

The rule takes an option which specifies when it should be applied. It can be set to one of the following values:

• "always" (default) expects that the shorthand will be used whenever possible.
• "methods" ensures the method shorthand is used (also applies to generators).
• "properties" ensures the property shorthand is used (where the key and variable name match).
• "never" ensures that no property or method shorthand is used in any object literal.
• "consistent" ensures that either all shorthand or all longform will be used in an object literal.
• "consistent-as-needed" ensures that either all shorthand or all longform will be used in an object literal, but ensures all shorthand whenever possible.

You can set the option in configuration like this:

{
    "object-shorthand": ["error", "always"]
}

Additionally, the rule takes an optional object configuration:

• "avoidQuotes": true indicates that longform syntax is preferred whenever the object key is a string literal (default: false). Note that this option can only be enabled when the string option is set to "always", "methods", or "properties".
• "ignoreConstructors": true can be used to prevent the rule from reporting errors for constructor functions. (By default, the rule treats constructors the same way as other functions.) Note that this option can only be enabled when the string option is set to "always" or "methods".
• "avoidExplicitReturnArrows": true indicates that methods are preferred over explicit-return arrow functions for function properties. (By default, the rule allows either of these.) Note that this option can only be enabled when the string option is set to "always" or "methods".

avoidQuotes

{
    "object-shorthand": ["error", "always", { "avoidQuotes": true }]
}

Example of incorrect code for this rule with the "always", { "avoidQuotes": true } option:

/*eslint object-shorthand: ["error", "always", { "avoidQuotes": true }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
    "bar-baz"() {}
};

Example of correct code for this rule with the "always", { "avoidQuotes": true } option:

/*eslint object-shorthand: ["error", "always", { "avoidQuotes": true }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
    "bar-baz": function() {},
    "qux": qux
};

ignoreConstructors

{
    "object-shorthand": ["error", "always", { "ignoreConstructors": true }]
}

Example of correct code for this rule with the "always", { "ignoreConstructors": true } option:

/*eslint object-shorthand: ["error", "always", { "ignoreConstructors": true }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
    ConstructorFunction: function() {}
};

avoidExplicitReturnArrows

{
    "object-shorthand": ["error", "always", { "avoidExplicitReturnArrows": true }]
}

Example of incorrect code for this rule with the "always", { "avoidExplicitReturnArrows": true } option:

/*eslint object-shorthand: ["error", "always", { "avoidExplicitReturnArrows": true }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
  foo: (bar, baz) => {
    return bar + baz;
  },

  qux: (foobar) => {
    return foobar * 2;
  }
};

Example of correct code for this rule with the "always", { "avoidExplicitReturnArrows": true } option:

/*eslint object-shorthand: ["error", "always", { "avoidExplicitReturnArrows": true }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
  foo(bar, baz) {
    return bar + baz;
  },

  qux: foobar => foobar * 2
};

Example of incorrect code for this rule with the "consistent" option:

/*eslint object-shorthand: [2, "consistent"]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
    a,
    b: "foo",
};

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "consistent" option:

/*eslint object-shorthand: [2, "consistent"]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
    a: a,
    b: "foo"
};

var bar = {
    a,
    b,
};

Example of incorrect code with the "consistent-as-needed" option, which is very similar to "consistent":

/*eslint object-shorthand: [2, "consistent-as-needed"]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var foo = {
    a: a,
    b: b,
};

When Not To Use It

Anyone not yet in an ES6 environment would not want to apply this rule. Others may find the terseness of the shorthand syntax harder to read and may not want to encourage it with this rule.

Further Reading

Object initializer - MDN Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

require let or const instead of var (no-var)

ECMAScript 6 allows programmers to create variables with block scope instead of function scope using the let and const keywords. Block scope is common in many other programming languages and helps programmers avoid mistakes such as:

var count = people.length;
var enoughFood = count > sandwiches.length;

if (enoughFood) {
    var count = sandwiches.length; // accidentally overriding the count variable
    console.log("We have " + count + " sandwiches for everyone. Plenty for all!");
}

// our count variable is no longer accurate
console.log("We have " + count + " people and " + sandwiches.length + " sandwiches!");

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at discouraging the use of var and encouraging the use of const or let instead.

Examples

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-var: "error"*/

var x = "y";
var CONFIG = {};

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-var: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

let x = "y";
const CONFIG = {};

When Not To Use It

In addition to non-ES6 environments, existing JavaScript projects that are beginning to introduce ES6 into their codebase may not want to apply this rule if the cost of migrating from var to let is too costly. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

disallow dangling underscores in identifiers (no-underscore-dangle)

As far as naming conventions for identifiers go, dangling underscores may be the most polarizing in JavaScript. Dangling underscores are underscores at either the beginning or end of an identifier, such as:

var _foo;

There is actually a long history of using dangling underscores to indicate "private" members of objects in JavaScript (though JavaScript doesn't have truly private members, this convention served as a warning). This began with SpiderMonkey adding nonstandard methods such as __defineGetter__(). The intent with the underscores was to make it obvious that this method was special in some way. Since that time, using a single underscore prefix has become popular as a way to indicate "private" members of objects.

Whether or not you choose to allow dangling underscores in identifiers is purely a convention and has no effect on performance, readability, or complexity. It's purely a preference.

Rule Details

This rule disallows dangling underscores in identifiers.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-underscore-dangle: "error"*/

var foo_;
var __proto__ = {};
foo._bar();

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-underscore-dangle: "error"*/

var _ = require('underscore');
var obj = _.contains(items, item);
obj.__proto__ = {};
var file = __filename;

Options

This rule has an object option:

• "allow" allows specified identifiers to have dangling underscores
• "allowAfterThis": false (default) disallows dangling underscores in members of the this object
• "allowAfterSuper": false (default) disallows dangling underscores in members of the super object

allow

Examples of additional correct code for this rule with the { "allow": ["foo_", "_bar"] } option:

/*eslint no-underscore-dangle: ["error", { "allow": ["foo_", "_bar"] }]*/

var foo_;
foo._bar();

allowAfterThis

Examples of correct code for this rule with the { "allowAfterThis": true } option:

/*eslint no-underscore-dangle: ["error", { "allowAfterThis": true }]*/

var a = this.foo_;
this._bar();

allowAfterSuper

Examples of correct code for this rule with the { "allowAfterSuper": true } option:

/*eslint no-underscore-dangle: ["error", { "allowAfterSuper": true }]*/

var a = super.foo_;
super._bar();

When Not To Use It

If you want to allow dangling underscores in identifiers, then you can safely turn this rule off. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

require let or const instead of var (no-var)

ECMAScript 6 allows programmers to create variables with block scope instead of function scope using the let and const keywords. Block scope is common in many other programming languages and helps programmers avoid mistakes such as:

var count = people.length;
var enoughFood = count > sandwiches.length;

if (enoughFood) {
    var count = sandwiches.length; // accidentally overriding the count variable
    console.log("We have " + count + " sandwiches for everyone. Plenty for all!");
}

// our count variable is no longer accurate
console.log("We have " + count + " people and " + sandwiches.length + " sandwiches!");

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at discouraging the use of var and encouraging the use of const or let instead.

Examples

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-var: "error"*/

var x = "y";
var CONFIG = {};

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-var: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

let x = "y";
const CONFIG = {};

When Not To Use It

In addition to non-ES6 environments, existing JavaScript projects that are beginning to introduce ES6 into their codebase may not want to apply this rule if the cost of migrating from var to let is too costly. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Suggest using template literals instead of string concatenation. (prefer-template)

In ES2015 (ES6), we can use template literals instead of string concatenation.

var str = "Hello, " + name + "!";

/*eslint-env es6*/

var str = `Hello, ${name}!`;

Rule Details

This rule is aimed to flag usage of + operators with strings.

Examples

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint prefer-template: "error"*/

var str = "Hello, " + name + "!";
var str = "Time: " + (12 * 60 * 60 * 1000);

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint prefer-template: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var str = "Hello World!";
var str = `Hello, ${name}!`;
var str = `Time: ${12 * 60 * 60 * 1000}`;

// This is reported by `no-useless-concat`.
var str = "Hello, " + "World!";

When Not To Use It

This rule should not be used in ES3/5 environments.

In ES2015 (ES6) or later, if you don't want to be notified about string concatenation, you can safely disable this rule.

Related Rules

• [no-useless-concat](no-useless-concat.md)
• [quotes](quotes.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/