JSLint is becoming stricter

[J.R.]

JSLint <http://www.jslint.com> has become more and more intolerant
recently. I have been noticing changes in JSLint in the past few months.
For instance, JSLint has begun to complain about the following pattern:

(function () {
// ...
})();

JSLint outputs an error such as "Problem at line 3 character 3: Move the
invocation into the parens that contain the function.
})();"

So what is wrong with the (function () { })() pattern?

 

[Lasse Reichstein Nielsen]

JSLint <http://www.jslint.com> has become more and more intolerant
recently. I have been noticing changes in JSLint in the past few
months. For instance, JSLint has begun to complain about the following
pattern:

(function () {
// ...
})();

JSLint outputs an error such as "Problem at line 3 character 3: Move
the invocation into the parens that contain the function.
})();"

So what is wrong with the (function () { })() pattern?

Nothing as such, but I guess Crockford prefers the other way:
(function(){... }())

JSLint is all about picking one coding style and warning if you don't
follow it. You don't have to agree with the coding style.

/L

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

JSLint is all about picking one coding style and warning if you don't
follow it.

I wouldn't go that far. It also reports coding errors that violate the rules
of the language, and I have often found it useful. The usefulness is
admittedly reduced by the messages that only relate to coding style.

Do you know some more objective linters for Javascript, or at least linters
that can easily be configured to suppress stylistic warnings?

 

[Eric Bednarz]

[JSLint]

Do you know some more objective linters for Javascript, or at least
linters that can easily be configured to suppress stylistic warnings?

http://javascriptlint.com/

 

[glathoud]

you can also try JSCheck: http://glat.info/jscheck/