`avoid-reverse` is wrong

[fregante]

Readme example:

const sum = array.reverse().reduce((p, c) => p + c, 0);
const reverseSum = array.reverse().reduceRight((p, c) => p + c, 0);

The sums are a bad example since their order doesn't matter. Try this:

['a','b','c'].reverse().reduce((p, c) => p + c, '');
// 'cba'
['a','b','c'].reverse().reduceRight((p, c) => p + c, '');
// 'abc'

['a','b','c'].reduce((p, c) => p + c, '');
// 'abc'
['a','b','c'].reduceRight((p, c) => p + c, '');
// 'cba'

Did you mean to replace .reverse().reduce() with .reduceRight() and vice-versa instead?

[freaktechnik]

I will admit that the readme examples aren't always great in showing the full behavior, their main intent is to show the syntax that triggers a rule, since the rules do not do any behavioral analysis of the callback.

The rule does indeed suggest to use reduceRight instead of reverse().reduce() and reduce instead of reverse().reduceRight().