Skip to content

Conversation

@siegfault
Copy link
Contributor

@siegfault siegfault commented May 15, 2020

When reverse and each are on separate lines, we end up autocorrecting

foo.reverse.
  each { ... }

to

foo.reverse_
  each { ... }

. With this change, we will instead update to

foo.reverse_each { ... }

Before submitting the PR make sure the following are checked:

  • Wrote good commit messages.
  • Commit message starts with [Fix #issue-number] (if the related issue exists).
  • Feature branch is up-to-date with master (if not - rebase it).
  • Squashed related commits together.
  • Added tests.
  • Added an entry to the Changelog if the new code introduces user-observable changes. See changelog entry format.
  • The PR relates to only one subject with a clear title
    and description in grammatically correct, complete sentences.
  • Run bundle exec rake default. It executes all tests and RuboCop for itself, and generates the documentation.

cc: @joe-sharp @dischorde

When reverse and each are on separate lines, we end up autocorrecting
```ruby
foo.reverse.
  each { ... }
```
to
```ruby
foo.reverse_
  each { ... }
```
. With this change, we will instead update to
```ruby
foo.reverse_each { ... }
```
@siegfault siegfault force-pushed the multiline_reverse_each branch from 0902cf5 to aed79fe Compare May 15, 2020 18:36
@siegfault
Copy link
Contributor Author

This has the potential to violate line length once auto corrected. Are there any concerns around that?

@koic koic merged commit 6001b51 into rubocop:master May 16, 2020
@koic
Copy link
Member

koic commented May 16, 2020

Yeah, I think broken code is more serious than the potential offense of Layout/LineLength. So, this change makes sense to me. Thank you!

@siegfault
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for looking at this so quickly!

@siegfault siegfault deleted the multiline_reverse_each branch May 19, 2020 21:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants