object-shorthand doesn't flag named functions

What rule do you want to change? object-shorthand

Does this change cause the rule to produce more or fewer warnings? more

How will the change be implemented? (New option, new default behavior, etc.)? New default behaviour for "object-shorthand": ["error", "methods"]

Please provide some example code that this change will affect:

export default {
  foo: function foo () {},
  bar: function baz () {}
}

What does the rule currently do for this code? Nothing, the rule passes

What will the rule do after it’s changed? foo should fail with “Expected method shorthand” bar should pass because the function name is different, but maybe have an option to fail that too?

[platinumazure]

Apologies @g-plane, I should have been more clear. My second paragraph wasn’t directed at you in particular (it was just my general thoughts on this issue). I apologize for the miscommunication, and I also apologize for unintentionally seeming like I was assuming you had a different position.

[not-an-aardvark]

Thanks for your interest in improving ESLint. Unfortunately, it looks like this issue didn’t get consensus from the team, so I’m closing it. We define consensus as having three 👍s from team members, as well as a team member willing to champion the proposal. This is a high bar by design – we can’t realistically accept and maintain every feature request in the long term, so we only accept feature requests which are useful enough that there is consensus among the team that they’re worth adding.

Since ESLint is pluggable and can load custom rules at runtime, the lack of consensus among the ESLint team doesn’t need to be a blocker for you using this in your project, if you’d find it useful. It just means that you would need to implement the rule yourself, rather than using a bundled rule that is packaged with ESLint.