rubocop VS Rubycritic

https://github.com/rubocop/rubocop/issues/8091#issuecomment-...

perhaps they are biased against the tool from participating in a campaign to police the name in the past.

gem "rubocop" - https://github.com/rubocop/rubocop | Set up code guidelines for your dev team, I recommend using whatever Standard recommends.

I believe if you use the `||` operator instead of `or`, then things just work out fine. I agree it is really annoying. But I am pretty sure if you use a tool like RuboCop https://github.com/rubocop/rubocop (a static code analysis tool) then it will catch bugs like this. Note that I am not recommending Ruby. But in my experience if you want to work with a language and it has a community style guide and a linter that enforces it, it will save me some heartache.

Adopt some sort of consistent formatting. Your top-level module starts off indented, seems like wasted space. May I suggest RuboCop?

By default, out of the box, RuboCop comes with a default set of pre-configured rules. The documentation will tell you Rubocop's default rules.

RuboCop is a Ruby static code analyzer (a.k.a. linter) and code formatter. Out of the box it will enforce many of the guidelines outlined in the community Ruby Style Guide. Apart from reporting the problems discovered in your code, RuboCop can also automatically fix many of them for you.

But I will encourage you to adopt Rubocop to enforce the style you want, so that if others want to contribute, they can write with spaces and then run rubocop -a and end up with the styling you prefer. Tabs indentation support was added a couple of years back: https://github.com/rubocop/rubocop/pull/7867

In my last job I encountered my first Rails codebase ever (mostly REST APIs but a few server-rendered views as well). After the initial chaotic impression of the codebase (it was a startup after all) with all the Rails magic on top, I really fell in love with the framework after a more experienced Rails dev introduced a few key conventions and helpful libraries to the codebase.

Out of those, I’d at least add the RuboCop [1] linter and the BetterSpecs [2] guidelines to this list. Both helped tremendously in eliminating bikeshedding in the team and freeing up brainpower to solve actual problems. The first one helped me learn intricacies of Ruby bit by bit right in my IDE and the latter guided us to write tests in a style that’s easy to maintain and trust.

[1] https://github.com/rubocop/rubocop

[2] https://www.betterspecs.org/

The third commit adds Rubycritic as a code quality static analysis.

You should consider using RubyCritic if you want a single place to review code improvements for your project. Including RubyCritic in your development process will certainly reduce the time a development team spends working on technical debts. Most technical debts will be mapped out at development time.

It's also possible to write unit tests in order to better understand or surface your assumptions about a legacy application. I'd also consider running rubycritic against legacy code, to see where the code smells and other hot spots lie.

RubyCritic: a gem that wraps around static analysis gems such as Reek, Flay, and Flog to provide a quality report of your Ruby code.