Linting Equilibrium

When introducing a linter into your workflow, you may notice that some input programs or constructs that previously worked fine are now flagged as issues. This is a natural part of the process. As a user, you may need to adapt by writing certain constructs or patterns slightly differently to satisfy the linter. While this adjustment can feel restrictive at first, it often leads to a more consistent and maintainable codebase in the long run.

Analogies

To better understand this process, let’s explore a few analogies:

Type Checkers in Strictly Typed Languages

In a strictly typed programming language, the type checker enforces rules that might initially feel cumbersome. For example, you might need to explicitly annotate types or refactor code to satisfy the type system. Over time, however, these constraints often lead to more robust and predictable programs. Similarly, a linter enforces stylistic or structural rules that may require you to adjust your code, but these adjustments often result in cleaner and more consistent code.

Auto-Formatters and Comment Placement

When using an auto-formatter like ocamlformat, you might find that certain comment placements or formatting choices are overridden. To work harmoniously with the formatter, you may need to adjust how and where you write comments. This can feel limiting at first, but it ultimately leads to a codebase with a uniform style, making it easier to read and maintain.

Code Coverage Tools

Code coverage tools often encourage you to write tests in a way that maximizes coverage. However, achieving 100% coverage might require you to refactor code or write additional tests for edge cases. While this can feel like extra effort, it often results in better-tested and more reliable software. Similarly, a linter may push you to rethink certain constructs, leading to improvements in code quality.

Avoiding the Feeling of "Fighting the System"

If you try to resist these tools and cling too tightly to your current way of writing things, you may feel like you’re constantly "fighting the system." Instead, embracing the feedback from the tool and adapting your style can lead to a more harmonious workflow. The key is to find a balance between your personal preferences and the tool’s requirements.

Work Around Limitations

It’s important to acknowledge that sometimes there may be limitations, defects, or constructs that are inherently difficult for the linter to support. This doesn’t necessarily mean these constructs are bad or undesirable, but rather that they may fall outside the scope of what the linter is designed to handle. In such cases, it’s worth considering whether the value you derive from using the linter outweighs the compromises you might need to make. You can always open issues and discuss potential improvements with the tool’s maintainers, but it’s also important to recognize that principled solutions may not always be straightforward. Being creative and open-minded in finding slight amendments or workarounds can often be the key to maintaining a productive and balanced workflow.

Finding Your Linting Equilibrium

In this documentation, we call this balance the "linting equilibrium". It’s a new, happy place where your personal style and the linter’s feedback coexist. It’s an evolution of your style, informed by the tool’s insights. By embracing this process, you can create a codebase that reflects both your preferences and the linter’s guidance.

Conclusion

We hope that as you onboard dunolint, you’ll find your own linting equilibrium — a place where your code is not only a reflection of your style but also satisfies the tool’s requirements. This balance can lead to a more consistent, maintainable, and enjoyable coding experience. Happy linting!