💅 noShadow false positive, flags conflict inside type definition when it shouldn't #6038
Description
Environment information
playgroundRule name
lint/nursery/noShadow
Playground link
Expected result
In the playground, noShadow flags the function argument in a type definition as shadowing a variable in the upper scope. This shouldn't matter, because the argument names in type definitions don't actually matter for the type definition.
Since the playground is kinda noisy for this, this is the diagnostic in question.
This variable shadows another variable with the same name in the outer scope.
1 │ type Props = {
2 │ contact: ContantData;
> 3 │ onChange?: (contact: ContantData) => void;
│ ^^^^^^^
4 │ onDelete?: (contact: ContantData) => void;
5 │ };
ℹ This is the shadowed variable, which is now inaccessible in the inner scope.
4 │ onDelete?: (contact: ContantData) => void;
5 │ };
> 6 │ const { contact = {}, onChange = () => {}, onDelete = () => {} }: Props = {};
│ ^^^^^^^
7 │
ℹ Consider renaming this variable. It's easy to confuse the origin of variables if they share the same name.
Code of Conduct
- I agree to follow Biome's Code of Conduct