Use sort.reverse instead of sort { |a, b| b <=> a } #10247

tas50 · 2020-08-03T22:24:15Z

It's faster. See rubocop/rubocop-performance#130

Signed-off-by: Tim Smith [email protected]

It's faster. See rubocop/rubocop-performance#130 Signed-off-by: Tim Smith <[email protected]>

Use sort.reverse instead of sort { |a, b| b <=> a }

a6fc057

It's faster. See rubocop/rubocop-performance#130 Signed-off-by: Tim Smith <[email protected]>

tas50 requested review from a team as code owners August 3, 2020 22:24

lamont-granquist approved these changes Aug 3, 2020

View reviewed changes

tas50 merged commit 9ea3dbb into master Aug 3, 2020

tas50 deleted the rubocop_Performance_SortReverse branch August 3, 2020 22:56

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Use sort.reverse instead of sort { |a, b| b <=> a } #10247

Use sort.reverse instead of sort { |a, b| b <=> a } #10247

tas50 commented Aug 3, 2020

Use sort.reverse instead of sort { |a, b| b <=> a } #10247

Use sort.reverse instead of sort { |a, b| b <=> a } #10247

Conversation

tas50 commented Aug 3, 2020