Rule proposal: validate PropTypes aren't typos

[jimbolla]

Rule would check that calls to React.PropTypes.whatever are valid. For instance, I have a bad habit of typing disabled: PropTypes.bools.isRequired instead of disabled: PropTypes.bool.isRequired. I've also done disabled: propTypes.bool.isRequired and disabled: propTypes.bool.isRequired() by accident.

[mik01aj]

+1, I have the same problem.

I also type React.propTypes instead of React.PropTypes, function instead of func, boolean instead of bool and I'm sometimes tempted to type obj instead of object.

[willklein]

👍 I have done this a lot. The abbreviations are inconsistent.

I was presenting on how to write lint rules at my React user group last night, and we live coded a first pass: willklein/scaling-best-practices@901534b

Needs more test cases and a few conditions. I'll see if I can get this wrapped up in the next week.

[lencioni]

@willklein have you made any progress on wrapping up this rule?

[samsch]

Bumping an old issue with a new case:

class A extends React.Component {
  render() {
    return <a href={this.props.href} >{this.props.children}</a>;
  }
}
A.PropTypes = {
  href: React.PropTypes.string.isRequired,
  children: React.PropTypes.node.isRequired,
}

This code will be linted by react/prop-types as missing prop types for href and children. The subtle problem here is that A.PropTypes = ... should be A.propTypes = ....

Could this rule find and warn/error on a case where prop types are being set in a component property other than propTypes?