On Friday, December 20, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> On 20.12.2013 11:51, Bozhidar Batsov wrote:
> > Just a small nitpick - everything that returns a value is actually an
> > expression, not a statement.
> >  
>  
>  
> It can be both (see "expression statement"). This way it's not  
> ambiguous, because I'm really aligning to the statement: the containing  
> expression, which follows the bob or an [implicit] semicolon.
>  
> In Rubocop, you've chosen to align to just the parent expression. Maybe  
> we should find a realistic example where one would be different from the  
> other.
>  
>  

I don’t quite understand what you mean.  
>  
> > Maybe `ruby-align-to-expr-keywords’ would be a more appropriate name for
> > the option.
> >  
>  
>  
> I was thinking rather of `ruby-align-to-statement'. A non-functional  
> change that may be easier to pronounce.
>  
>  

Sounds reasonable.  
>  
> > Btw, I noticed this in the indent examples:
> >  
> > zoo
> > .lose(
> > q, p)
> >  
> > Shouldn’t it be:
> >  
> > zoo
> > .lose(
> > q, p)
> >  
>  
>  
> Maybe, but that's harder to do. Basically, we'd want to keep the  
> additional indentation when and only when the parent token (.), or any  
> one of its siblings (in case of a chained method call) are at indentation.
>  
> Checking if the parent is at indentation is easy, but finding its  
> siblings - not so much.
>  
>  

I guess this can be ignored for now, since such code is not particularly common.