3 ms·

Couldn't agree more. Our Rubocop is FULL of customizations and the odd override too (though there is a case some overrode a rule which caused massively confusi

• ysavir 6y ago
  That's a horrible usecase for single use private methods, agreed. But I think they're an excellent way to breakdown a complex chunk of code into smaller components, using the method names to describe what they're doing. That requires good naming, though; without good names, the effort is moot.
  • ljm 6y ago
    I think they serve a good purpose once you realise you've stepped out of OOP. You have the idea of a command, or a service, and it does a bunch of procedural things as part of its execution. It only has one public method, so the private methods are a way to describe the steps of the command. But that's an architectural decision, it's not code style. If rubocop tells you how to write a function then you're going to see nonsense like the example in our parent comment.
    • ysavir 6y ago
      > I think they serve a good purpose once you realise you've stepped out of OOP. You have the idea of a command, or a service, and it does a bunch of procedural things as part of its execution. It only has one public method, so the private methods are a way to describe the steps of the command. It doesn't have to be a step out of OOP, and their usage is not limited to "Single Public Method Objects". Single use methods are just a convenient and clean way to make complicated code easy to digest, OOP or not.