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

2 participants