Go-tools: staticcheck doesn't create GitHub Annotations

[marten-seemann]

I'm looking for a way to have staticcheck create annotations on PRs, something like this:

Running staticcheck in golangci-lint produces such annotations, but the standalone version doesn't.

I created a minimal working example in

The GitHub Actions workflow is the following:

on: [push, pull_request]
jobs:
  lint:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v2
      - uses: actions/setup-go@v2
        with:
          go-version: "1.15.x"
      - run: go get honnef.co/go/tools/cmd/staticcheck
      - run: staticcheck ./...

It does find the problem in my code (if you look at the linter output), but the PR is not annotated: https://github.com/marten-seemann/linter-test/pull/2/files

[dominikh]

It works for me when using the following action instead:

on: [push, pull_request]
jobs:
  lint:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v2
      - uses: actions/setup-go@v1
        with:
          go-version: "1.15.x"
      - run: go get honnef.co/go/tools/cmd/staticcheck
      - run: $(go env GOPATH)/bin/staticcheck ./...

The only relevant difference is that it's using setup-go@v1 instead of v2. (It also has to call the staticcheck binary directly, as setup-go@v1 didn't add $GOPATH/bin to the PATH, but that should not be important.)

So, to me, this looks like a regression in the setup-go action. Looking at the difference between v1 and v2, the pattern they use to match output has changed from ^([^:]*: )?((.:)?[^:]*):(\\d+)(:(\\d+))?: (.*)$ to ^\\s*(\\.{0,2}[\\/\\\\].+\\.go):(?:(\\d+):(\\d+):)? (.*) (\ are escaped because the expressions are stored in JSON strings)

And indeed, the new pattern doesn't match our output. I'll try and file an issue with the setup-go people.

[dominikh]

I have sent https://github.com/actions/setup-go/pull/98

[mvdan]

Wow, very nice digging!

[dominikh]

Lacking any progress whatsoever in actions/setup-go, I now recommend using https://github.com/WillAbides/setup-go-faster instead, which is faster and has sensible problem matchers.

[dominikh]

I am going to close this. Upstream is being upstream, and setup-go-faster is a better alternative that works correctly.

We'll mention it when we publish our article on running Staticcheck in CI.