Has anyone got clj-kondo working with better-cond? It'd be nice to get better support for it's non-standard use of :let [..], etc. For now, I'm just using:

{:unresolved-symbol {:exclude [(better-cond.core/cond)]}}

@pithyless I'm not familiar with better-cond. Can you post some examples to give me an idea?

I probably can't do it more justice than this example from the README: https://github.com/Engelberg/better-cond#usage

But for purpose of clj-kondo, I think this is the crux of it:

(b/cond
  :let [num 42]
  (= num 42) :life)

kondo is highlighting the num in let as unresolved

probably the config you're using is best for now. I don't see enough similarity with other built-in macros

Yeah, I think you would need to be able to traverse and evaluate (psuedocode):

[(:symbol better-cond.core/cond) [:* (:pairs [:keyword :let] [:eval-like clojure.core/let-bindings])]]

Hey! Love clj-kondo. Currently adding it to CI. One question: can the program ignore all warnings and only fail if there are errors?

Or is it only able to suppress warnings on specific symbols?

you can ignore exit codes lower than 3 in CI to fail only in case of error

@eelke that's right. https://github.com/borkdude/clj-kondo#exit-codes

also each linter's level is configurable, so if you want to disable one kind of linter, you can set its level to :off in the configuration

or to :warning, :error or :info