Add "Positional arguments" subsection #356
Conversation
| @@ -422,6 +422,8 @@ end | |||
|
|
|||
| === Enums [[enums]] | |||
|
|
|||
| === Hash syntax [[hash-syntax]] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should be a sub-section, so four ====
| @@ -440,6 +442,22 @@ class Transaction < ApplicationRecord | |||
| end | |||
| ---- | |||
|
|
|||
| === Positional arguments [[positional-arguments]] | |||
|
|
|||
| Prefer using positional arguments instead of keyword arguments when defining enums. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I’m on the fence if this should be in the guide.
I can see the Rails team trying to get rid of the code that detects the enum attribute name.
I can also see potential mistakes like enum status: {a: 1}, priority: {high:1,…}. But is it common?
But how does that stylistically differ for the rest of us? Why do people need to care? If it’s older Rails - use any of the teo. If it’s new, only the positional would work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You're right - since deprecation notice captures the old syntax, seems like we don't need to have a dedicated cop for this at all, I'll close both PRs 😬
thanks for the feedback!
Related to rubocop/rubocop-rails#1239