My Beef with RuboCop
The issues raised here completely align with my problems with Rubocop.<p>It seems that a lot of people think that one of the main goals for code linting is consistency, when that shouldn&#x27;t be a goal at all. Consistency is merely a tool, the goal should be readability&#x2F;maintainability. Consistency is just one tool that is available to us in persuit of that goal.<p>I&#x27;ve hit similar issues to those mentioned in the article and it absolutely infuriates me when I have to jump through hoops (or worse, reduce the readability of my code) to push well thought out code that communicates intent, only to fall foul of a robot that doesn&#x27;t understand nuance.<p>Don&#x27;t get me wrong, I think Rubocop is a great tool, it&#x27;s just over-used, and that&#x27;s in part because everything is on by default, and this seems to be encouraged by the general community. It seems that once programmers have found a solution to something they love to apply that solution to all places that it will work, regardless of the efficacy.<p>My preference, and I suppose suggestion, is to let Rubocop handle things it knows about with a high degree of accuracy, such as tabs&#x2F;spaces for lead indentation, security issues etc. and leave anything that requires nuance or subtlety to the programmer who wrote it, and the educational opportunity of the code review.<p>After all, &quot;Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative&quot; :)