Szymon Fiedler
@szymonfiedler.bsky.social
Senior Software Engineer building systems that scale. Domain-Driven Design practitioner, RailsEventStore maintainer, event sourcing expert. arkency member.
Nothing fancy on my side
theme = dark:Rose pine moon,light:Rose pine dawn
window-height = 40
window-width = 120
font-family = "JetBrainsMono Nerd Font Mono"
font-size = 14
font-thicken = false
adjust-cursor-thickness = 200%
copy-on-select = clipboard
theme = dark:Rose pine moon,light:Rose pine dawn
window-height = 40
window-width = 120
font-family = "JetBrainsMono Nerd Font Mono"
font-size = 14
font-thicken = false
adjust-cursor-thickness = 200%
copy-on-select = clipboard
October 29, 2025 at 6:44 PM
Nothing fancy on my side
theme = dark:Rose pine moon,light:Rose pine dawn
window-height = 40
window-width = 120
font-family = "JetBrainsMono Nerd Font Mono"
font-size = 14
font-thicken = false
adjust-cursor-thickness = 200%
copy-on-select = clipboard
theme = dark:Rose pine moon,light:Rose pine dawn
window-height = 40
window-width = 120
font-family = "JetBrainsMono Nerd Font Mono"
font-size = 14
font-thicken = false
adjust-cursor-thickness = 200%
copy-on-select = clipboard
Nope, but I’ll probably submit it to upcoming conferences as it was well received so far.
It starts as a rant on Rubocop rules, but then there’s this nice plot twist with over 26k db records broken and some other 6k as a sideffect.
It starts as a rant on Rubocop rules, but then there’s this nice plot twist with over 26k db records broken and some other 6k as a sideffect.
October 29, 2025 at 10:37 AM
Nope, but I’ll probably submit it to upcoming conferences as it was well received so far.
It starts as a rant on Rubocop rules, but then there’s this nice plot twist with over 26k db records broken and some other 6k as a sideffect.
It starts as a rant on Rubocop rules, but then there’s this nice plot twist with over 26k db records broken and some other 6k as a sideffect.
Btw. @joel.drapper.me it had perfect timing with your post „Bugs of Omission and Bugs of Commission”, so I mentioned it on my slides.
The bug itself was obviously the latter.
The bug itself was obviously the latter.
October 29, 2025 at 10:20 AM
Btw. @joel.drapper.me it had perfect timing with your post „Bugs of Omission and Bugs of Commission”, so I mentioned it on my slides.
The bug itself was obviously the latter.
The bug itself was obviously the latter.
For the sake of formatting, I prefer tools like github.com/ruby-syntax-... (it integrates with Rubocop, btw.)
But still, I also align with team practices. But at some point in time I question those who don't make much sense or cause harm.
Maybe I should submit my talk to some upcoming conferences😅
But still, I also align with team practices. But at some point in time I question those who don't make much sense or cause harm.
Maybe I should submit my talk to some upcoming conferences😅
GitHub - ruby-syntax-tree/syntax_tree: Interact with the Ruby syntax tree
Interact with the Ruby syntax tree. Contribute to ruby-syntax-tree/syntax_tree development by creating an account on GitHub.
github.com
October 29, 2025 at 10:05 AM
For the sake of formatting, I prefer tools like github.com/ruby-syntax-... (it integrates with Rubocop, btw.)
But still, I also align with team practices. But at some point in time I question those who don't make much sense or cause harm.
Maybe I should submit my talk to some upcoming conferences😅
But still, I also align with team practices. But at some point in time I question those who don't make much sense or cause harm.
Maybe I should submit my talk to some upcoming conferences😅
Thanks for your input Lucian!
Speaking of `===`, please see my response below.
All your points are valid, I'm not against Rubocop. My problem is that people push too much on `Style/*` rules, while there many much more important and more useful, like `Security/*`, `Lint/*` ones.
Or custom ones.
Speaking of `===`, please see my response below.
All your points are valid, I'm not against Rubocop. My problem is that people push too much on `Style/*` rules, while there many much more important and more useful, like `Security/*`, `Lint/*` ones.
Or custom ones.
That's a neat trick!
`===` is semantically meningful for Range, Regexp, Class, Proc...
I don't get banning it and forcing awkward workarounds that are often less clear about intent.
Recently, I had a talk on Poznań Ruby User Group about data damage caused by enforcing this Rubocop Rule ;)
`===` is semantically meningful for Range, Regexp, Class, Proc...
I don't get banning it and forcing awkward workarounds that are often less clear about intent.
Recently, I had a talk on Poznań Ruby User Group about data damage caused by enforcing this Rubocop Rule ;)
October 29, 2025 at 10:05 AM
Thanks for your input Lucian!
Speaking of `===`, please see my response below.
All your points are valid, I'm not against Rubocop. My problem is that people push too much on `Style/*` rules, while there many much more important and more useful, like `Security/*`, `Lint/*` ones.
Or custom ones.
Speaking of `===`, please see my response below.
All your points are valid, I'm not against Rubocop. My problem is that people push too much on `Style/*` rules, while there many much more important and more useful, like `Security/*`, `Lint/*` ones.
Or custom ones.
That's a neat trick!
`===` is semantically meningful for Range, Regexp, Class, Proc...
I don't get banning it and forcing awkward workarounds that are often less clear about intent.
Recently, I had a talk on Poznań Ruby User Group about data damage caused by enforcing this Rubocop Rule ;)
`===` is semantically meningful for Range, Regexp, Class, Proc...
I don't get banning it and forcing awkward workarounds that are often less clear about intent.
Recently, I had a talk on Poznań Ruby User Group about data damage caused by enforcing this Rubocop Rule ;)
October 29, 2025 at 9:51 AM
That's a neat trick!
`===` is semantically meningful for Range, Regexp, Class, Proc...
I don't get banning it and forcing awkward workarounds that are often less clear about intent.
Recently, I had a talk on Poznań Ruby User Group about data damage caused by enforcing this Rubocop Rule ;)
`===` is semantically meningful for Range, Regexp, Class, Proc...
I don't get banning it and forcing awkward workarounds that are often less clear about intent.
Recently, I had a talk on Poznań Ruby User Group about data damage caused by enforcing this Rubocop Rule ;)
I’m more of a filter coffee person. I don’t have espresso machine, but I’ve experimented with aeropress filter on the top of coffee in moka pot back in the days. I like espresso very much, but I don’t drink enough of it to buy a machine and moka pot is too much hassle to get desired quality of shot.
October 22, 2025 at 2:29 PM
I’m more of a filter coffee person. I don’t have espresso machine, but I’ve experimented with aeropress filter on the top of coffee in moka pot back in the days. I like espresso very much, but I don’t drink enough of it to buy a machine and moka pot is too much hassle to get desired quality of shot.
Don’t you lose crema because of that?
October 22, 2025 at 9:21 AM
Don’t you lose crema because of that?
Is this 404 kind of trolling?
October 15, 2025 at 6:16 PM
Is this 404 kind of trolling?
Great points!
Btw. there’s a book titled „Slack: Getting Past Burnout, Busywork, and the Myth of Total Efficiency” by Tom DeMarco on that topic
Btw. there’s a book titled „Slack: Getting Past Burnout, Busywork, and the Myth of Total Efficiency” by Tom DeMarco on that topic
October 15, 2025 at 4:52 PM
Great points!
Btw. there’s a book titled „Slack: Getting Past Burnout, Busywork, and the Myth of Total Efficiency” by Tom DeMarco on that topic
Btw. there’s a book titled „Slack: Getting Past Burnout, Busywork, and the Myth of Total Efficiency” by Tom DeMarco on that topic
I knew you’ll like it 🤣
April 18, 2025 at 9:59 AM
I knew you’ll like it 🤣
Probably verbs are the biggest struggle with their forms:
I went - Ja poszedłem (M), Ja poszłam (F)
You went - Ty poszedłeś (M), Ty poszłaś (F)
She went - Ona poszła
He went - On poszedł
It went - Ono poszło
We went - My poszliśmy (M/F)
They went - Oni poszli (M), One poszły (F), Oni poszli (M+F)
I went - Ja poszedłem (M), Ja poszłam (F)
You went - Ty poszedłeś (M), Ty poszłaś (F)
She went - Ona poszła
He went - On poszedł
It went - Ono poszło
We went - My poszliśmy (M/F)
They went - Oni poszli (M), One poszły (F), Oni poszli (M+F)
April 17, 2025 at 8:52 PM
Probably verbs are the biggest struggle with their forms:
I went - Ja poszedłem (M), Ja poszłam (F)
You went - Ty poszedłeś (M), Ty poszłaś (F)
She went - Ona poszła
He went - On poszedł
It went - Ono poszło
We went - My poszliśmy (M/F)
They went - Oni poszli (M), One poszły (F), Oni poszli (M+F)
I went - Ja poszedłem (M), Ja poszłam (F)
You went - Ty poszedłeś (M), Ty poszłaś (F)
She went - Ona poszła
He went - On poszedł
It went - Ono poszło
We went - My poszliśmy (M/F)
They went - Oni poszli (M), One poszły (F), Oni poszli (M+F)