Security News
tea.xyz Spam Plagues npm and RubyGems Package Registries
Tea.xyz, a crypto project aimed at rewarding open source contributions, is once again facing backlash due to an influx of spam packages flooding public package registries.
remark-lint-no-literal-urls
Advanced tools
Readme
remark-lint
rule to warn for autolink literals.
This package is a unified (remark) plugin, specifically a remark-lint
rule.
Lint rules check markdown code style.
You can use this package to check that autolink literal URLs are not used.
This rule is included in the following presets:
Preset | Setting |
---|---|
remark-preset-lint-markdown-style-guide | |
remark-preset-lint-recommended |
This package is ESM only. In Node.js (version 12.20+, 14.14+, or 16.0+), install with npm:
npm install remark-lint-no-literal-urls
In Deno with esm.sh
:
import remarkLintNoLiteralUrls from 'https://esm.sh/remark-lint-no-literal-urls@3'
In browsers with esm.sh
:
<script type="module">
import remarkLintNoLiteralUrls from 'https://esm.sh/remark-lint-no-literal-urls@3?bundle'
</script>
On the API:
import {read} from 'to-vfile'
import {reporter} from 'vfile-reporter'
import {remark} from 'remark'
import remarkLint from 'remark-lint'
import remarkLintNoLiteralUrls from 'remark-lint-no-literal-urls'
main()
async function main() {
const file = await remark()
.use(remarkLint)
.use(remarkLintNoLiteralUrls)
.process(await read('example.md'))
console.error(reporter(file))
}
On the CLI:
remark --use remark-lint --use remark-lint-no-literal-urls example.md
On the CLI in a config file (here a package.json
):
…
"remarkConfig": {
"plugins": [
…
"remark-lint",
+ "remark-lint-no-literal-urls",
…
]
}
…
This package exports no identifiers.
The default export is remarkLintNoLiteralUrls
.
unified().use(remarkLintNoLiteralUrls[, config])
This rule supports standard configuration that all remark lint rules accept
(such as false
to turn it off or [1, options]
to configure it).
There are no options.
Autolink literal URLs (just a URL) are a feature enabled by GFM.
They don’t work everywhere.
Due to this, it’s recommended to instead use normal autolinks
(<https://url>
) or links ([text](url)
).
remark-stringify
never creates autolink literals and always uses normal autolinks (<url>
).
ok.md
<http://foo.bar/baz>
No messages.
not-ok.md
👉 Note: this example uses GFM (
remark-gfm
).
http://foo.bar/baz
1:1-1:19: Don’t use literal URLs without angle brackets
Projects maintained by the unified collective are compatible with all maintained versions of Node.js. As of now, that is Node.js 12.20+, 14.14+, and 16.0+. Our projects sometimes work with older versions, but this is not guaranteed.
See contributing.md
in remarkjs/.github
for ways
to get started.
See support.md
for ways to get help.
This project has a code of conduct. By interacting with this repository, organization, or community you agree to abide by its terms.
FAQs
remark-lint rule to warn when URLs without angle brackets are used
The npm package remark-lint-no-literal-urls receives a total of 105,707 weekly downloads. As such, remark-lint-no-literal-urls popularity was classified as popular.
We found that remark-lint-no-literal-urls demonstrated a healthy version release cadence and project activity because the last version was released less than a year ago. It has 3 open source maintainers collaborating on the project.
Did you know?
Socket for GitHub automatically highlights issues in each pull request and monitors the health of all your open source dependencies. Discover the contents of your packages and block harmful activity before you install or update your dependencies.
Security News
Tea.xyz, a crypto project aimed at rewarding open source contributions, is once again facing backlash due to an influx of spam packages flooding public package registries.
Security News
As cyber threats become more autonomous, AI-powered defenses are crucial for businesses to stay ahead of attackers who can exploit software vulnerabilities at scale.
Security News
UnitedHealth Group disclosed that the ransomware attack on Change Healthcare compromised protected health information for millions in the U.S., with estimated costs to the company expected to reach $1 billion.