Skip to content

chore: fix JavaScript lint errors (issue #11065)#11067

Closed
MANDEep22332 wants to merge 1 commit intostdlib-js:developfrom
MANDEep22332:fix/ztest-benchmark-lint-11065-v2
Closed

chore: fix JavaScript lint errors (issue #11065)#11067
MANDEep22332 wants to merge 1 commit intostdlib-js:developfrom
MANDEep22332:fix/ztest-benchmark-lint-11065-v2

Conversation

@MANDEep22332
Copy link
Contributor

@MANDEep22332 MANDEep22332 commented Mar 21, 2026

type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes. report:

  • task: lint_filenames status: passed
  • task: lint_editorconfig status: passed
  • task: lint_markdown status: na
  • task: lint_package_json status: na
  • task: lint_repl_help status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_src status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_cli status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_examples status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_tests status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_benchmarks status: passed
  • task: lint_python status: na
  • task: lint_r status: na
  • task: lint_c_src status: na
  • task: lint_c_examples status: na
  • task: lint_c_benchmarks status: na
  • task: lint_c_tests_fixtures status: na
  • task: lint_shell status: na
  • task: lint_typescript_declarations status: passed
  • task: lint_typescript_tests status: na
  • task: lint_license_headers status: passed ---

Resolves #11065 .

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

  • {{TODO: Replaced new Array(100) + index-based assignment (x[i] = ...) with [] + x.push(...) pattern for consistency with project style}}

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request has the following related issues:

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

  • Yes
  • No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

  • Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
  • Test/benchmark generation
  • Documentation (including examples)
  • Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance. This helps reviewers determine how much scrutiny to apply when reviewing your contribution. Example disclosures: "This PR was written primarily by Claude Code." or "I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase, but the proposed changes were fully authored manually by myself.".

{{TODO: add disclosure if applicable}}

@stdlib-js/reviewers

@MANDEep22332
chore: fix JavaScript lint errors (issue stdlib-js#11065)
ce74591 
---
type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes.
report:
  - task: lint_filenames
    status: passed
  - task: lint_editorconfig
    status: passed
  - task: lint_markdown
    status: na
  - task: lint_package_json
    status: na
  - task: lint_repl_help
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_src
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_cli
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_examples
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_tests
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_benchmarks
    status: passed
  - task: lint_python
    status: na
  - task: lint_r
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_src
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_examples
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_benchmarks
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_tests_fixtures
    status: na
  - task: lint_shell
    status: na
  - task: lint_typescript_declarations
    status: passed
  - task: lint_typescript_tests
    status: na
  - task: lint_license_headers
    status: passed
---
@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot added Statistics Issue or pull request related to statistical functionality. Needs Review A pull request which needs code review. Good First PR A pull request resolving a Good First Issue. labels Mar 21, 2026
@stdlib-bot
Copy link
Contributor

stdlib-bot commented Mar 21, 2026

Coverage Report

Package Statements Branches Functions Lines
stats/ztest $\color{green}396/396$
$\color{green}+100.00%$ 		$\color{green}62/62$
$\color{green}+100.00%$ 		$\color{green}3/3$
$\color{green}+100.00%$ 		$\color{green}396/396$
$\color{green}+100.00%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.

@Aniket-SS
Copy link
Contributor

Aniket-SS commented Mar 21, 2026

You referenced to a PR that is already closed in the related issues section!

@MANDEep22332
Copy link
Contributor Author

MANDEep22332 commented Mar 21, 2026

@Aniket-SS that is right, how can i attach a open pr . i attach the merged issue pr to pull request

@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Mar 21, 2026
Open
@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot added the Potential Duplicate There might be another pull request resolving the same issue. label Mar 22, 2026
@kgryte kgryte added autoclose: Project Conventions Pull request which should be auto-closed due to not following project conventions. and removed Needs Review A pull request which needs code review. labels Mar 23, 2026
@stdlib-bot
Copy link
Contributor

stdlib-bot commented Mar 23, 2026

Thank you for working on this pull request. However, we cannot accept your contribution as this pull request does not follow project conventions.

We place a high value on consistency throughout the stdlib codebase, and this pull request was found to significantly deviate from stdlib conventions. We encourage you to closely examine other packages in stdlib and attempt to emulate the practices and conventions found therein.

  • If you are attempting to contribute a new package, sometimes the best approach is to simply copy the contents of an existing package and then modify the minimum amount necessary to implement the feature (e.g., changing descriptions, parameter names, and implementation).
  • If you are contributing tests, find a package implementing a similar feature and emulate the tests of that package.
  • If you are updating documentation, examine several similar packages and emulate the content, style, and prose of those packages.

In short, the more effort you put in to ensure that your contribution looks and feels like stdlib—including variables names, bracket spacing, line breaks, etc—the more likely that your contribution will be reviewed and ultimately accepted. We encourage you to closely study the codebase before continuing to work on this pull request.

Thank you again for your interest in stdlib, and we look forward to reviewing your future contributions.

@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot closed this Mar 23, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

autoclose: Project Conventions Pull request which should be auto-closed due to not following project conventions. Good First PR A pull request resolving a Good First Issue. Potential Duplicate There might be another pull request resolving the same issue. Statistics Issue or pull request related to statistical functionality.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Fix JavaScript lint errors

4 participants

@MANDEep22332 @stdlib-bot @Aniket-SS @kgryte