Don't consider <=> a comparison method #4615
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
iGEL
force-pushed
the
dont_compare_spaceships
branch
2 times, most recently
from
80ce153
to
b771c08
Compare
Drenmi
approved these changes
Jul 19, 2017
iGEL
force-pushed
the
dont_compare_spaceships
branch
from
b771c08
to
53d2fa5
Compare
mikegee
reviewed
Jul 19, 2017
| @@ -412,7 +412,7 @@ | |||
| context 'with a comparison method' do | |||
| let(:source) { 'foo.bar <=> :baz' } | |||
|
|
|||
| it { expect(send_node.comparison_method?).to be_truthy } | |||
| it { expect(send_node.comparison_method?).to be_falsey } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe change the source here instead of the expectation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, that was stupid. Fixed.
iGEL
force-pushed
the
dont_compare_spaceships
branch
from
53d2fa5
to
27d4d38
Compare
mikegee
approved these changes
Jul 19, 2017
iGEL
force-pushed
the
dont_compare_spaceships
branch
from
27d4d38
to
e014dfb
Compare
11 tasks
bbatsov
reviewed
Aug 8, 2017
| @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ class Node < Parser::AST::Node # rubocop:disable Metrics/ClassLength | |||
| include RuboCop::AST::Sexp | |||
| extend NodePattern::Macros | |||
|
|
|||
| COMPARISON_OPERATORS = %i[== === != <= >= > < <=>].freeze | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd add a note here about why <=> is not considered a comparison method.
|
You'll have to rebase on top of the current master and address the failing build. |
|
@iGEL ping :-) |
I believe, the `<=>` operator should not be considered as a `.comparison_method?`. The main reason is, that this method in difference to all other comparison methods doesn't return a boolean, but `-1`, `0` or `1`. Thus, many assumptions for comparison methods don't apply, for example, there isn't an inverse comparison method (like `<` is the inverse of `>=)`, `* -1` isn't a comparison). This is an alternative to rubocop#4603 by me.
iGEL
force-pushed
the
dont_compare_spaceships
branch
from
e014dfb
to
5390f4e
Compare
|
@bbatsov Pong :-) |
|
👍 |
5 tasks
iGEL
added a commit
to iGEL/rubocop
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 22, 2017
In @e900036, I changed a spec to make it pass without thinking about it. This was pointed out in the [code review](rubocop#4615 (review)) by @mikegee and I fixed it, but then somehow that thing got lost again, possibly during rebasing. Sorry about that.
bbatsov
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 22, 2017
In @e900036, I changed a spec to make it pass without thinking about it. This was pointed out in the [code review](#4615 (review)) by @mikegee and I fixed it, but then somehow that thing got lost again, possibly during rebasing. Sorry about that.
This was referenced Nov 6, 2019
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.
I believe, the
<=>operator should not be considered as a.comparison_method?.The main reason is, that this method in difference to all other comparison methods doesn't return a boolean, but
-1,0or1. Thus, many assumptions for comparison methods don't apply, for example,there isn't an inverse comparison method (like
<is the inverse of>=),* -1isn't a comparison).This is an alternative to #4603 by me, where I just prevented
Style/YodaConditionto consider it.[Fix #issue-number](if the related issue exists).master(if not - rebase it).rake spec) are passing.rake internal_investigation.and description in grammatically correct, complete sentences.
rake generate_cops_documentation(required only when you've added a new cop or changed the configuration/documentation of an existing cop).