-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
BlockAlignment on chaining methods #393
Comments
The reason why this is reported as an offence is the implementation from #362, which was a fix for #346. I'm starting to think that it was a mistake to introduce that change. The Style Guide says that "multiline chaining is always ugly" and multiline chaining is exactly what #346 was about. I propose that we remove the handling introduced in #362. That will solve this issue. |
I also think that multiline chaining should be avoided. |
Fixes rubocop#393 by removing the solution for rubocop#346.
Some Ruby DSLs, like RSpec, are pretty much about chaining. Therefore, I'll probably end up keeping this cop disabled, which is fine by me. |
@SirLenz0rlot had to do the same. But I disagree with the guide. Multi-line chaining, IMO, looks totally ok if you're using |
I have similar code that results in a BlockAlignment failure:
Note, this passes:
While I prefer to write down the first.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: