Supress validation for a line/file

[jasperfirecai2]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
On some workflows, the linter will mark things as potential issues because of the way it was written. however, as a writer you have additional information and can possibly conclude that there is no problem. In that situation, having a linter warning is mildly annoying.

For example, I have a workflow that dynamically gets the name of a secret and the accesses secrets[that value]. Linter tell me that the context access might be invalid. this is correct, but I know that the only possible values should be valid or I've done something wrong elsewhere.

Describe the solution you'd like
I'd like to have something along the lines of #pylint: disable etc. for this extension, whether it be a comment ( similar to pylint or eslint ), a config file (e.g. for file x ignore y), an extension setting (ignore warnings of type/ ignore files). To suppress warnings that you know are invalid, to help reduce false positives for issues that the extension simply lacks context for, or to purge warnings that come from bugs of third party workflow authors.

Additional context
related: #59

[felipesu19]

#196

#196

Not the same, although related to same root problem (Underided problems being reported)
it's a diametrically opposed solution covering a very different scenario.

Extended comment there about the difference.

TLDR:

This is about "Configure your code". (Which has its use cases)
The other (#196) is about "configure the linter". (Which covers a very different use cases)

[jasperfirecai2]

While my use case is not the same as that of the other issue, the solution to both can be one and the same. A comment can be file-wide and a config file can be file or project wide. Read the 'describe the solution you'd like'

While my use case is not the same as that of the other issue, the solution to both can be one and the same. A comment can be file-wide and a config file can be file or project wide. Read the 'describe the solution you'd like'

You're right, my fault was reading the title... 😉

[cringdahl]

This would be especially useful for something like octokit/request-action, which takes arbitrary input keys, but kicks out errors for every one of them.

[austinibele]

Bump. This would be very helpful.

[MatthieuBizien]

I had to disable the extension because of this, otherwise I have false positives due to problems in .venv.

Official VSCode response: "I think the right and efficient approach is to extensions provide options to exclude." microsoft/vscode#22289 from @sandy081

[alexkli]

@MatthieuBizien Agree here:

1. VS Code should have an option to ignore problems in folders globally. I basically never want to see errors from 3rd party code in node_modules, regardless of language/linter/extension. Too bad VS code team doesn't see this the same way :-(
2. Without 1 being available, the github actions extension should offer a way to ignore or just an option to respect .gitignore, on by default, so I don't have to configure the same folders many times. 🙏

A polluted problems view filled with false positives that never go away (!) is just going to be useless since you'll be trained to ignore it.