Unintended indent for multiline template string argument combined with another multiline argument

Tell us about your environment

• ESLint Version: 4.3.0
• Node Version: 8.1.3
• npm Version: 5.0.3

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

I tried both default and babel-eslint. They’re giving me same result.

Please show your full configuration:

Configuration

{
    "env": {
        "es6": true,
        "node": true
    },
    "extends": [
        "eslint:recommended"
    ],
    "rules": {
        "indent": ["error", 4]
    }
}

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

const f = (first, second) => {
    return second;
};

// works for multiline template strings
f(`
    multiline
    template
    string
`, `
    multiline
    template
    string
`);

// works for multiline objects
f({
    foo: 'foo',
    bar: 'bar',
}, {
    foo: 'foo',
    bar: 'bar',
});

// doesn't work for multiline template string and multiline object
f(`
    multiline
    template
    string
`, {
    foo: 'foo',
    bar: 'bar',
});

What did you expect to happen?

I expected all of the three examples will pass.

What actually happened? Please include the actual, raw output from ESLint.

  31:1  error  Expected indentation of 8 spaces but found 4  indent
  32:1  error  Expected indentation of 8 spaces but found 4  indent
  33:1  error  Expected indentation of 4 spaces but found 0  indent

I believe the eslint fix is incorrect

 const f = (first, second) => {
     return second;
 };
 
 // works for multiline template strings
 f(`
     multiline
     template
     string
 `, `
     multiline
     template
     string
 `);

 // works for multiline objects
 f({
     foo: 'foo',
     bar: 'bar',
 }, {
     foo: 'foo',
     bar: 'bar',
 });

 // doesn't work for multiline template string and multiline object
 f(`
     multiline
     template
     string
 `, {
-    foo: 'foo',
-    bar: 'bar',
-});
+        foo: 'foo',
+        bar: 'bar',
+    });

Could you please confirm this is an unintended behaviour? Thank you.

[platinumazure]

@not-an-aardvark Where are we at on this issue?

[not-an-aardvark]

We actually have a test asserting the current behavior, so I think this is working as intended. I don’t recall if there was a specific reason why I added that test, though. I think I agree that your proposed behavior makes more sense.