if config appears in project folder, configs in home directory can't be seen totally

Tell us about your environment Linux version 3.6.32-431.11.2.el6.x86_64 ([e-mail]) (gcc version 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-4) (GCC) ) #1 SMP Tue Mar 25 19:59:55 UTC 2014

• ESLint Version: v3.11.1

• Node Version: v7.2.0

• npm Version: 3.10.9 What parser (default, Babel-ESLint, etc.) are you using? espree Please show your full configuration:

in .eslintrc in ~/:
{
	"env":{
		"browser":true
		,"node":true
		,"es6":true
	}
	,"extends":"eslint:recommended"
}

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the next cause problem(if removed works as expected):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
in project directory:

either place the following in package.json:
eslintConfig:{}

or file .eslintrc with following content exists
{}

What did you do? Please include the actual source code causing the issue.

in app.js
const a=1;

What did you expect to happen? config cascading and hierarchy take effect.

run: eslint --print-config app.js long config list shows, with the same content with when no empty config appears in project folder;

run: eslint app.js error ‘a’ is assigned a value but never used no-unused-vars

What actually happened? Please include the actual, raw output from ESLint. run: eslint --print-config app.js { “globals”: {}, “env”: {}, “rules”: {}, “parserOptions”: {} }

run: eslint app.js error Parsing error: The keyword ‘const’ is reserved

[nzakas]

I think the current behavior is correct. the home directory is a special case because it can unintentionally affect a lot of projects (iirc this was an early complaint). I think changing that now would be confusing and possibly damaging to the current user base.

I’m all for updating the docs to make this special case clearer.

[kaicataldo]

@ljharb I believe the accepted resolution here is to update the docs to make it clear that the home directory is a special case. I agree with others that this is too big a breaking change to introduce now.