I expect no-unused-vars rule to be skipped if there is an object spread

const { foo, ...rest } = obj;

“foo” is defined but never used happens, but in most case you still want to do this because you want to take obj without some named fields.

I personally would expect the no-unused-vars rule to be skipped if there is an object spread.

[fredguest]

@nzakas, i agree with @gre that this is not being handled correctly at the moment. for the linter to remain silent when foo in the code example above is unused would not be a special affordance, it would be the correct behavior in every instance. the analog is the linter’s behavior in this scenario:

someCallback(arg1, arg2) {
  return arg2;
}

the linter does not warn about arg1 being unused, because it accounts for the fact that it may only be present to access arg2. the scenario with a rest spread is exactly the same; because the destructured variables preceding the rest object may only be present to access the rest object, the linter should never complain if they are unused.

[victormiguez]

If anyone need this just like me today, it`s already possible to do with no-unused-vars: [“error”, { “ignoreRestSiblings”: true }].