unavoidable dogsled for functions outside your control about dogsled

[alexkohler]

Hi, thanks for the issue (also, hello to a fellow Auroran 😄).

Presumably, the intention of this linter is to warn when people have written functions like runtime.Caller and should return a struct instead.

This is generally the intent, but dogsled itself was written around the heuristic that 3+ blank identifiers is usually a code smell. For example, your runtime.Caller example is ignoring the ok return value, which could lead to self being something other than the expected value (the file name). I could see the merit in configurable exclusions though. If you're using something like golangci-lint, you could also use their nolint directive or configure an exclude rule (https://golangci-lint.run/usage/false-positives/).

[mmcloughlin]

You're at Aurora too! Nice :)

Thanks for pointing out the ok return from runtime.Caller. I've fixed it and re-enabled the linter.

I still think there's a potential issue here, and a similar point is raised in #2. Some kind of configurability would be good, like an ignore_outside_package flag or just an ignore list.

Thanks again!

[alexkohler]

Some kind of configurability would be good, like an ignore_outside_package flag or just an ignore list.

Completely agree. Going to keep this issue open as I think this could be a good future enhancment, especially if dogsled is being used as a standalone tool.

[garrettthomaskth]

Hi, I am trying to use a //nolint:dogsled directive, but I am getting Error: directive //nolint:dogsled is unused for linter "dogsled" (nolintlint)
I think it is similar to this golangci/golangci-lint#1940