Dominik Honnef
Dominik Honnef
@lordofscripts and ranging over a string produces runes.
> as s1007 and q1013 may report twice the error That's probably not much of a problem, especially because QF checks are only used in gopls, not the `staticcheck` CLI...
Sorry, but I don't have the capacity for that. Please see https://github.com/dominikh/.github/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#pull-requests for some background.
> I wonder if there is a way to do it using pure staticcheck Not at the moment, no. I'll have to think about it.
As far as I can tell from that screenshot, that error is reported to us either by `go build` or by `go/types`, Staticcheck is merely forwarding it. You'll have to...
This issue is more about the lack of a call to m.Run than a call to os.Exit.
> and so it will return an error on unknown checks We intentionally don't complain on unknown checks, at least in the `staticcheck.conf` case. This is both for backwards and...
This seems more like something to be reported at https://github.com/golang/go than us. It looks like vendoring and tool dependencies aren't interacting correctly, or at least as expected? At any rate,...
If you are using Go 1.24.1 to build Staticcheck, then that's what's being used. We don't have to update the `go` statement in `go.mod` for that. And we won't, as...
Although it is also worth pointing out that I cannot reproduce the problem. ``` > go version go version go1.24.1 linux/amd64 > mkdir testing > cd testing > go mod...