Lock in $30 Savings on PRO—Offer Ends Soon! ⏳
Speaker Deck
Features
Speaker Deck
PRO
Sign in
Sign up for free
Search
Search
My Problem, My Solution
Search
Penelope Phippen
September 12, 2014
Technology
1
58
My Problem, My Solution
A talk about typing I gave at Frozen Rails 2014
Penelope Phippen
September 12, 2014
Tweet
Share
More Decks by Penelope Phippen
See All by Penelope Phippen
Introducing Rubyfmt
penelope_zone
0
590
How RSpec Works
penelope_zone
0
6.7k
Quick and easy browser testing using RSpec and Rails 5.1
penelope_zone
1
94
Teaching RSpec to play nice with Rails
penelope_zone
2
150
Little machines that eat strings
penelope_zone
1
110
What is processor (brighton ruby edition)
penelope_zone
0
120
What is processor?
penelope_zone
1
370
extremely defensive coding - rubyconf edition
penelope_zone
0
280
Agile, etc.
penelope_zone
2
240
Other Decks in Technology
See All in Technology
バグハンター視点によるサプライチェーンの脆弱性
scgajge12
3
1k
グレートファイアウォールを自宅に建てよう
ctes091x
0
140
AI時代におけるアジャイル開発について
polyscape_inc
0
130
形式手法特論:CEGAR を用いたモデル検査の状態空間削減 #kernelvm / Kernel VM Study Hokuriku Part 8
ytaka23
2
450
AWS re:Invent 2025で見たGrafana最新機能の紹介
hamadakoji
0
130
Microsoft Agent 365 を 30 分でなんとなく理解する
skmkzyk
1
1k
生成AI時代の自動E2Eテスト運用とPlaywright実践知_引持力哉
legalontechnologies
PRO
0
210
Challenging Hardware Contests with Zephyr and Lessons Learned
iotengineer22
0
120
【CEDEC+KYUSHU2025】学生・若手必見!テクニカルアーティスト 大全 ~仕事・スキル・キャリアパス、TAの「わからない」を徹底解剖~
cygames
PRO
0
150
コミューンのデータ分析AIエージェント「Community Sage」の紹介
fufufukakaka
0
440
新 Security HubがついにGA!仕組みや料金を深堀り #AWSreInvent #regrowth / AWS Security Hub Advanced GA
masahirokawahara
1
1.5k
re:Inventで気になったサービスを10分でいけるところまでお話しします
yama3133
1
120
Featured
See All Featured
Fight the Zombie Pattern Library - RWD Summit 2016
marcelosomers
234
17k
ピンチをチャンスに:未来をつくるプロダクトロードマップ #pmconf2020
aki_iinuma
128
54k
Statistics for Hackers
jakevdp
799
230k
Connecting the Dots Between Site Speed, User Experience & Your Business [WebExpo 2025]
tammyeverts
10
720
No one is an island. Learnings from fostering a developers community.
thoeni
21
3.5k
Designing Experiences People Love
moore
143
24k
Fashionably flexible responsive web design (full day workshop)
malarkey
407
66k
CoffeeScript is Beautiful & I Never Want to Write Plain JavaScript Again
sstephenson
162
15k
Large-scale JavaScript Application Architecture
addyosmani
515
110k
Documentation Writing (for coders)
carmenintech
76
5.2k
Facilitating Awesome Meetings
lara
57
6.7k
Intergalactic Javascript Robots from Outer Space
tanoku
273
27k
Transcript
The maybe monad as a replacement for nil
My Problem My Solution
Everyone Stand Up
None
a!/samphippen
My Problem
Type Checking is the Antithesis of Object Oriented Programming
Type
Types
What is a type?
What is a data type?
A type is a set of possible values and operations
Class
Terms are literally interchangeable in Ruby
Terms are literally interchangeable in Ruby Konstantin
Fixnum
✕
+
/
—
1.class # => Fixnum
You know what all these things do
1+1 # => 2
Array
count
each
In Ruby some types are interchangeable
Typeclass
A set of types and common operations
There is some expectation of what the operations will do
Duck typing
All number types in Ruby form a typeclass
Fixnum Float BigDecimal
Numeric Op Numeric = Numeric
Positive Numeric + Positive Numeric = Positive Numeric =
Also collections
Hash Set Array
Type Checking is the Antithesis of Object Oriented Programming
Type Checking is the Antithesis of Object Oriented Programming
Type Checking
This term has two meanings
Compile time type checking
public static final List<string> seriouslyiamsoboredwh ocares
Like in Java
Clearly we don’t do this in Ruby
So what do I mean?
ActiveRecord::Base #find_by
pony = Pony.find_by(:id => smth) pony.neigh
pony = Pony.find_by(:id => smth) if pony pony.neigh else puts
“No Pony can’t neigh” end
The problem here is two return types
nil Pony < AR::Base
We’re forced to add a type check
Also, I think this is the wrong type check
pony = Pony.find_by(:id => smth) if !pony.nil? pony.neigh else puts
“No Pony can’t neigh” end
A more explicit type check
But still wrong
pony = Pony.find_by(:id => smth) if !pony.nil? pony.neigh else puts
“No Pony can’t neigh” end
pony = Pony.find_by(:id => smth) if pony.respond_to?(:neigh) pony.neigh else puts
“No Pony can’t neigh” end
This type checking adds unnecessary complexity to our app
Type Checking is the Antithesis of Object Oriented Programming
Type Checking is the Antithesis of Object Oriented Programming
Antithesis
I am using it to mean “DOING IT WRONG”
Type Checking is the Antithesis of Object Oriented Programming
Type Checking is the Antithesis of Object Oriented Programming
Object oriented programming
Konstantin Haase says:
Data abstraction and control abstraction
Alan Kay says:
Everything is an object
Objects communicate by sending and receiving messages
def bees if :bar == a.foo else end end
def bees a.foo nil end
Tell don’t ask
Objects have their own memory (in terms of objects).
Data hiding
Every object is an instance of a class (which must
be an object).
The class holds the shared behavior for its instances (in
the form of objects in a program list)
To eval a program list, control is passed to the
first object and the remainder is treated as its message.
Type Checking is the Antithesis of Object Oriented Programming
Type Checking is the Antithesis of Object Oriented Programming
My Problem
My Problem
My Solution
Just always make your methods return things of a consistent
type class
Thanks!
No obviously there’s more
Third party APIs do this all the time
pony = Pony.find_by(:id => smth) if pony pony.neigh else puts
“No Pony can’t neigh” end
The problem here is two return types
As a client of this API I am forced to
add a type check
nil is such a common case
How do we fix it?
Null object pattern
I think this one is quite well known
class Pony def horse_power 0.5 end end
Pony.find_by( :key => value ) || NullPony.new
class NullPony def horse_power 0 end end
NullPony quacks the same as Pony
Solves the typing problem
Summing over ponies will only count Pony objects
0 might be the wrong default
Pony * NullPony = 0
Decided the default for horse_power when defining the class
Change is inevitable
Can’t predict how NullPony will be used in the future
Maybe Typeclass
Solves same problem
Allows for runtime defaults
#map(&blk) -> Maybe #value_or(a) -> a
class Just def initialize(value) @value = value end def map(&blk)
def value_or(x) Just.new(blk.call(@value)) @value end end end
class Nothing def map(&blk) self end def value_or(x) x end
end
A consistent interface for dealing with missing values
NoMethodError: undefined method `foo' for nil:NilClass
NoMethodError: undefined method `foo' for nil:NilClass
[Maybe, Nothing, Maybe]
call map on all of them
collapse with value_or
To Recap:
Null object can replace nils if you know the defaults
at class definition time
Maybe if you want defaults at run time
Your job is not to make Alan Kay happy
RSpec RSpec ! ! RSpec 3
tinyurl.com/ samfr2014
Let’s have some questions a!/samphippen
[email protected]