ramseyinhouse / ramsey-cop Goto Github PK

References:
https://rubocop.readthedocs.io/en/latest/cops_style/
https://github.com/lampo/dev-standards/blob/e9b96354eb81c4ea4e7ce9de4d890ba7d063547a/ruby/coding_standards/01_source_code_layout.md#underscores-in-numerics

The default is to require the underscores for any number with 5 or more digits. As can be seen here, this affects postal codes.

Do we use this cop and set the min to 6 to avoid postal codes?
Do we suggest postal codes be set as strings instead of integers, and leave it at 5?
Do we turn it off altogether?

Our team had an internal rule for 120 characters that seemed easy to live by, but I am finding that 100 feels cramped (especially for slightly too-long string literals).

Anyone have thoughts on this?

Expected Behavior

• ramsey-cop will lint my rails code

Actual Behavior

• rubocop no longer lints rails code by default; you have to add rubocop-rails

Steps to Reproduce Behavior

• install ramsey-cop gem

Specifications

(e.g. versions, operating system, hardware, etc.)

Our standards say that we should always favor double quotes over single quotes. Should this be the case? Shouldn't we only favor double quotes if we're doing interpolation?

Layout/ExtraSpacing:

• AllowForAlignment: true
  • When true, allows most uses of extra spacing if the intent is to align things with the previous or next line, not counting empty lines or comment lines.
• ForceEqualSignAlignment: false
  • When true, forces the alignment of = in assignments on consecutive lines.

👍

foo = bar
some_other_foo = a_different_bar

❤️

foo            = bar
some_other_foo = a_different_bar

👎

foo =            bar
some_other_foo = a_different_bar

Our styleguide favors double-quoted unless it is not possible to use them.

Apparently the community likes to indent access modifiers. I like having them unindented. Thoughts?

Metrics/BlockLength:
CountComments: false # count full line comments?
Max: 25

Metrics/ClassLength:
CountComments: false # count full line comments?
Max: 100

Metrics/MethodLength:
CountComments: false # count full line comments?
Max: 10

Metrics/ModuleLength:
CountComments: false # count full line comments?
Max: 100

The current MethodLength (max 10) and AbcSize (max 15), which come from Rubocop's default settings, seem quite low. For projects that enforce that all checks pass, it feels like these two are creating a perverse incentive to break code apart in potentially unhelpful ways.

I'd like to discuss increasing these to a potentially higher value. I welcome your constructive observations, objections, and suggestions.

I have two documents I want to add to this repo

Introducing RamseyCop to an existing repository
Using VIM, RamseyCop and Asynchronous Lint Engine

I was just going to add a couple of .md files in the repo, but then I started to question that.

• This could be considered secondary documentation. Should we have a supporting documentation directory?
• Should we instead use the Wiki for this kind of documentation?
• How do we decide what is worth being in the repo versus in the wiki?
• Is it important to us for this kind of documentation to go through a PR process?

I brought this up to @jwsloan and he had a great question

How [would we] do this if it were open sourced?

@lampo/ruby-miners

Should we require the magic comment to freeze string literals?
# frozen_string_literal: true

Presumably this will not be necessary when we begin using Ruby 3.0.

👍 for yes (continue with the default setting), 👎 for no (change the default setting)