I've found that telling agents to not do something mostly just gives them a suggestion of a way to do that thing, and the part about not doing it that way gets lost. Well, it's nicely accessible for when it apologizes for doing it.
I now try to only give examples of how I want it to do things, and hooks that complain when they do the bad thing (but still don't mention the bad thing in the complaint.)
I would actually prefer chained ternaries over more verbose if/else expressions with duplicated LHS, so this does go back to the argument about "taste".
I've found that telling agents to not do something mostly just gives them a suggestion of a way to do that thing, and the part about not doing it that way gets lost. Well, it's nicely accessible for when it apologizes for doing it.
I now try to only give examples of how I want it to do things, and hooks that complain when they do the bad thing (but still don't mention the bad thing in the complaint.)
I would actually prefer chained ternaries over more verbose if/else expressions with duplicated LHS, so this does go back to the argument about "taste".
This is one of the things I like about Rust. You can have both.
Unfortunately not all languages are Rust.That isn't more concise than
But it's more readable, and that's what matters.
You're better off using linting for something specific like that.