eslint/grouped-accessor-pairs Style

🚧 An auto-fix is still under development.

What it does

Require grouped accessor pairs in object literals and classes

Why is this bad?

While it is allowed to define the pair for a getter or a setter anywhere in an object or class definition, it’s considered a best practice to group accessor functions for the same property.

Examples

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

const foo = {
  get a() {
    return this.val;
  },
  b: 1,
  set a(value) {
    this.val = value;
  },
};

Examples of correct code for this rule:

const foo = {
  get a() {
    return this.val;
  },
  set a(value) {
    this.val = value;
  },
  b: 1,
};

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the getBeforeSet option:

const foo = {
  set a(value) {
    this.val = value;
  },
  get a() {
    return this.val;
  },
};

Examples of correct code for this rule with the getBeforeSet option:

const foo = {
  get a() {
    return this.val;
  },
  set a(value) {
    this.val = value;
  },
};

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the setBeforeGet option:

const foo = {
  get a() {
    return this.val;
  },
  set a(value) {
    this.val = value;
  },
};

Examples of correct code for this rule with the setBeforeGet option:

const foo = {
  set a(value) {
    this.val = value;
  },
  get a() {
    return this.val;
  },
};

How to use

To enable this rule in the CLI or using the config file, you can use:

CLI

oxlint --deny grouped-accessor-pairs

Config (.oxlintrc.json)

{
  "rules": {
    "grouped-accessor-pairs": "error"
  }
}

References

• Rule Source