False positive for global-require

Tell us about your environment

• ESLint Version: 4.0.0
• Node Version: 7.10.0
• npm Version: 5.0.3

What parser (default, Babel-ESLint, etc.) are you using? default

Please show your full configuration:

{
	"env": {
		"es6": true,
		"node": true
	},
	"extends": "eslint:recommended",
	"rules": {
		"global-require": "error"
	}
}

What did you do? Please include the actual source code causing the issue. This code is at the top level of the file:

var botVersion = process.env.npm_package_version || require('./package.json').version;

What did you expect to happen? I expect this code to work without warnings, as the statement is at the top level of the file. Notably, as the documentation of the global-require rule states, using a ternary operator instead gives no warnings:

var botVersion = process.env.npm_package_version ? process.env.npm_package_version : require('./package.json').version;

And the documentation for the no-unneeded-ternary rule asserts that using a logical OR operator should provide “the same functionality” as a ternary in this case.

What actually happened? Please include the actual, raw output from ESLint. ESLint gives a warning:

1:53   error    Unexpected require()                                            global-require

[ljharb]

Lumping everything into no-restricted-syntax makes it really hard to configure in a shared config, because there’s no way to specify in JSON/YML that I want to add to the existing array of restricted syntaxes - which means I have to gather up and copy/paste the entire list from wherever it’s defined.

[platinumazure]

It seems to me that this rule might be taking on too much responsibility. I think we should consider splitting this into two rules with ESLint 5.x:

• global-require ensures that any call to (non-shadowed) require() must be in global or module scope, i.e., not in a block or function scope. It does not care about how the require() is invoked.
• New rule no-conditional-require ensures that require() calls cannot be in a ConditionalExpression or LogicalExpression.

Would that make sense?