DT-462: Add RFC for Reek configuration by arielj · Pull Request #5 · fastruby/RFCs

arielj · 2025-06-02T19:48:11Z

Read the .md file included in the DIFF for details.

You can see the parsed version of the file at https://github.com/fastruby/RFCs/blob/DT-462-shared-default-reek-configuration/2025-06-02-default-reek-configuration.md

fbuys · 2025-08-28T14:51:00Z

+It's a combination of the [official `rails-friendly` configuration recommended in the Reek's README](https://github.com/troessner/reek?tab=readme-ov-file#working-with-rails) and some changes to the default rules.
+
+```yml
+detectors:


I think this is useful too.
It allows us to do rescue e => and map { |x| x.do_something }

UncommunicativeVariableName: accept: - e - x

sounds good

I wonder if we should also add _ for those times we have a unused variable?

added these 3 accepted short names

I wonder if we should add k and v as they are common short names for key and value when iterating over a hash

Sounds good to me

I updated this to include k and v

FionaDL · 2025-09-05T02:40:40Z

+  TooManyStatements:
+    max_statements: 10 # original is 5
+  DuplicateMethodCall:
+    max_calls: 3 # original is 1


Is this enough for tests?

what do you mean?

Maybe I am wrong, but from what I remember the duplicate method calls happen often in tests when you are calling a method several times??

I just tried calling a method multiple times in a single test and reek doesn't complain about it

I'm not sure how it works internally but it seems it won't complain during tests? we can always change this later to disable it for the test and spec directories I guess if it starts creating issues (maybe there's some edge case I don't know how to trigger)

mateusdeap · 2025-09-05T08:41:09Z

+    UnusedPrivateMethod:
+      enabled: false


I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better to have it be true. Even in controllers and models, if it's unused, wouldn't we want to remove them?

the problem with this rule is that (at least from my tests), it's not smart enough to detect that you are referencing a private method in a callback, as in before_action :some_private_method on a controller or an after_save :do_something_private in a model

we have that enabled above in general, but we are disabling them for controllers and models

it was showing many false positives saying a private method was not used when it was used in a callback

fbuys · 2025-09-10T15:16:04Z

+It's a combination of the [official `rails-friendly` configuration recommended in the Reek's README](https://github.com/troessner/reek?tab=readme-ov-file#working-with-rails) and some changes to the default rules.
+
+```yml
+detectors:


I wonder if we should also add _ for those times we have a unused variable?

fbuys · 2025-09-10T15:47:11Z

+    public_methods_only: true # original is false
+
+directories: # reek's recommendation for Rails applications unless a comment is added
+  "app/controllers":


In the past I have found the following helpful in controllers too:

FeatureEnvy: enabled: false TooManyMethods: enabled: false TooManyStatements: enabled: false

FeatureEnvy: It is easy for controller methods to interact with other parts of the application
TooManyMethods: Controllers can easily go over 15 methods
TooManyStatements: Controllers methods easily go over 5 lines

do you think those are better fully disabled or maybe add as exceptions when needed?

I'm running reek on fastruby with the current state of this proposed config and I don't get any TooManyMethods nor FeatureEnvy warnings for controllers, and only 2 TooManyStatements in one of the controllers (maybe those actions can be ignored as exceptions or refactored)

maybe we can disable TooManyMethods for controllers and models too? I don't think it adds that much value (I think we are already good at not putting methods where they don't belong, and when they are in the right place it would be annoying to have reek complain just because of the number)

I am onboard with disabling TooManyMethods in controllers/models yes.
And perhaps you are right, we can disable feature envy and too many statements where needed.

I added the change to ignore TooManyMethods for models and controllers

JuanVqz

Looks good to me as initial RFC

rishijain · 2025-10-14T12:56:17Z

+  NilCheck:
+    enabled: false # in some projects were this was enabled, it was a false positive being ignored
+  TooManyStatements:
+    max_statements: 10 # original is 5


I think for some of the client projects, we might be easily breaking this rule as we do not have any control on the state at which we start working on the project.

I see that TooManyStatements is set to false for controllers and models. I think that do cover some of my concern. Although I have seen clients putting more than 10 lines of code in methods that are placed under lib, config.

this will not be used on client projects, only for internal projects and only for FastRuby.io, Ombulabs.com, and Points for now

rishijain · 2025-10-14T13:15:20Z

I think we can add these as well to the starting point:

Long Parameter List (https://github.com/troessner/reek/blob/master/docs/Long-Parameter-List.md) - This encourages better design.

TooManyInstanceVariables - Right now, we have set it to false. Although I think we should set it to true with may be a higher number of variables allowed. It signals that classes doing too much.

Data Clump (https://github.com/troessner/reek/blob/master/docs/Data-Clump.md) - It also encourages the idea of using objects and cleaner design.

arielj · 2025-10-14T13:27:44Z

I think we can add these as well to the starting point:

Long Parameter List (https://github.com/troessner/reek/blob/master/docs/Long-Parameter-List.md) - This encourages better design.

TooManyInstanceVariables - Right now, we have set it to false. Although I think we should set it to true with may be a higher number of variables allowed. It signals that classes doing too much.

Data Clump (https://github.com/troessner/reek/blob/master/docs/Data-Clump.md) - It also encourages the idea of using objects and cleaner design.

LongParameterList and DataClump are enabled by default already, and we are not disabling them

for TooManyInstanceVariables, this is also enabled by default, we are disabling it only for controllers because we usually set many instance variables to pass data to the views

rishijain · 2025-10-14T13:30:58Z

👍

julioalucero

It is nice to have this new configuration as a starting point!

arielj added 2 commits June 2, 2025 16:46

DT-462: Add RFC for Reek configuration

2748514

DT-462: Updates based on feedback by amanda and ernesto

a1f61ce

fbuys reviewed Aug 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

JuanVqz reviewed Sep 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread 2025-06-02-default-reek-configuration.md

FionaDL reviewed Sep 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread 2025-06-02-default-reek-configuration.md

mateusdeap reviewed Sep 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread 2025-06-02-default-reek-configuration.md

fbuys reviewed Sep 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

DT-462: add UncommunicativeVariableName exceptions

b73f255

hmdros reviewed Oct 13, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread 2025-06-02-default-reek-configuration.md

DT-462: address some feedback of the RFC

9945f2c

JuanVqz reviewed Oct 13, 2025

View reviewed changes

rishijain reviewed Oct 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

julioalucero approved these changes Oct 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

Conversation

arielj commented Jun 2, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

arielj Sep 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

arielj Sep 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JuanVqz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rishijain commented Oct 14, 2025

Uh oh!

arielj commented Oct 14, 2025

Uh oh!

rishijain commented Oct 14, 2025

Uh oh!

julioalucero left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

8 participants

arielj commented Jun 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

arielj Sep 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

arielj Sep 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading