Do not suggest #name= for #name and vice versa #180
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Co-authored-by: Jean byroot Boussier <jean.boussier+github@shopify.com>
|
LGTM, thank you! |
matzbot
pushed a commit
to ruby/ruby
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 5, 2022
(ruby/did_you_mean#180) * Do not suggest #name= for #name and vice versa * Avoid allocating unnecessary MatchData Co-authored-by: Jean byroot Boussier <jean.boussier+github@shopify.com> Co-authored-by: Jean byroot Boussier <jean.boussier+github@shopify.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A recent discussion on Hacker News reminded me of a particular type of suggestion that seems always irrelevant and potentially confusing. That would be suggesting
#foowhen someone callsobj.foo = 1or#foo=when someone callsobj.foo. I have actually seen inexperienced Rubyists read the message, scratch their heads, and tryobj.foo(1)before moving on to their next idea.Example:
This is a fairly brute force implementation -- if the missing method name ends with =, only suggest methods that do, and vice versa. A more nuanced approach would be just to exclude the exact method name with = added or removed, as the case may be. I'm happy to spend some more time on it if the general proposal is welcome.