00:36 <o0x1eef> Monday thoughts. Ruby was made to increase developer happiness, and tools that are pedantic and inflexible achieve exactly the opposite. I'm thinking of the rubocop defaults, and in practical terms - when a business adopts such a tool - it achieves the opposite.

00:42 <dionysus69> o0x1eef: only incompetent people would implement rubocop defaults on an existing project, I am speaking from experience :) I call it following rules as a facade

00:46 <o0x1eef> To be fair rubocop is a great tool. But I think it is too strict, too pedantic, and that leaves me frustrated and depressed. I like standardrb. I think the facade is that there's always a choice. That's just not true. Especially at $corp.

00:51 <Caius> standardrb are better defaults, rubocop itself is a very good tool but the out-the-box irritate me and are too overreaching

00:53 <o0x1eef> Agreed

22:33 <havenwood> o0x1eef: Ruby should ship with a `ruby fmt` that is not pedantic unless `--pedantic`.

22:35 <havenwood> I've suggested it to a few Ruby Core folk who've agreed. I think the challenge is curating that "not pedantic" subset and implementing either a pure Ruby solution simpler than RuboCop or an optional Rust extension or whatever.

22:35 <havenwood> Ruby itself has been applying some relaxed RuboCop to stdlib, IIR from glancing at commits a while back.

22:36 <havenwood> A standardized, simpler and faster linter would be great.

22:40 <leah2> rubocop lints !!foo