Disable EnforcedShorthandSyntax in Style/HashSyntax

[rafaelfranca]

We should not be forcing the shorthand syntax because of a few reasons:

1. That syntax doesn't always yields the best/clear code. It has
   surprising behavior specially with method calls using the key names.
2. Ruby 3.1 shorthand syntax is still not supported by Sorbet.

We can fix 2, but not 1, so it is better to just allow people to chose
when to use the shorthand syntax in the context that makes sense.

[sambostock]

What are your opinions on the no_mixed_keys setting?

[rafaelfranca]

ruby19 seems better to me. If keys needs to be string, they still need to use hash rocket, so we sometimes need to mix syntax. Although that only happens if people are creating hashes that hold two different key types, which is so rare that I don't think we should care about that case.

[tomstuart]

@rafaelfranca core currently has EnforcedShorthandSyntax: never in its RuboCop configuration, presumably to avoid the always default causing violations. If we upgrade rubocop-shopify to v2.5.0 in core, can we remove that configuration entirely (i.e. inherit either) or would you like to keep it pinned to the more conservative never?

[tomstuart]

core currently has EnforcedShorthandSyntax: never in its RuboCop configuration, presumably to avoid the always default causing violations. If we upgrade rubocop-shopify to v2.5.0 in core, can we remove that configuration entirely (i.e. inherit either) or would you like to keep it pinned to the more conservative never?

I’ve speculatively done the former in Shopify/shopify#340042.

[andyw8]

Update: Ruby 3.1 shorthand syntax is now supported by Sorbet.

[sambostock]

I suspect we'll still leave it up to the author to choose.

One thing I've noticed is that some issues & PRs cite this PR saying that "shorthand syntax should not be used", which as far as I can tell is incorrect. If I'm not mistaken, our stance is that we don't enforce shorthand syntax, but we do allow it, at the authors discretion, with the expectation that they go with what is clearest in that context.

x, y, z = string.split(",").map(&:to_f)
Point.new(x: x, y: y, z: z) # fine
Point.new(x:, y:, z:)       # also fine