Upgrade to Pro
— share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …
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
39
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
500
How RSpec Works
penelope_zone
0
6.3k
Quick and easy browser testing using RSpec and Rails 5.1
penelope_zone
1
75
Teaching RSpec to play nice with Rails
penelope_zone
2
120
Little machines that eat strings
penelope_zone
1
79
What is processor (brighton ruby edition)
penelope_zone
0
92
What is processor?
penelope_zone
1
340
extremely defensive coding - rubyconf edition
penelope_zone
0
230
Agile, etc.
penelope_zone
2
200
Other Decks in Technology
See All in Technology
4年前、あるじゃん老害エンジニアLT合戦に登壇、米国西海岸コンピュータ歴史博物館体験記の続編
toshi_atsumi
0
200
キャラクター制御のためのプロンプト術 for LINE Bot
uezo
0
530
アクセシビリティを考慮したUI/CSSフレームワーク・ライブラリ選定
yajihum
2
680
Aurora MySQL v3(MySQL8.0互換)の オンラインDDLの罠挙動を全バージョンで検証した
yutakikai
1
150
Data and AI Governance: Existing Challenges and Emerging Trends
scotthsieh825
0
170
LLM とプロンプトエンジニアリング/チューターをビルドする / LLM and Prompt Engineering and Building Tutors
ks91
PRO
0
220
GraphQL 成熟度モデルの紹介と、プロダクトに当てはめた事例 / GraphQL maturity model
mh4gf
6
470
エンタープライズ環境下での Active Directory の運用 TIPS
tamaiyutaro
1
1.6k
o11y入門_外形監視を利用したWebアプリケーションへの最適なモニタリング_TechBrew
k5k
3
100
"好き"との生活/Regularly update profile with GitHub Actions
judeeeee
0
150
Four keys改善の取り組み事例紹介
sansantech
PRO
3
230
長期運用プロジェクトでのMySQLからTiDB移行の検証
colopl
2
710
Featured
See All Featured
RailsConf & Balkan Ruby 2019: The Past, Present, and Future of Rails at GitHub
eileencodes
124
32k
Designing for Performance
lara
601
67k
CSS Pre-Processors: Stylus, Less & Sass
bermonpainter
352
28k
A Philosophy of Restraint
colly
196
16k
Templates, Plugins, & Blocks: Oh My! Creating the theme that thinks of everything
marktimemedia
18
1.7k
Build The Right Thing And Hit Your Dates
maggiecrowley
23
2k
Infographics Made Easy
chrislema
237
18k
Bootstrapping a Software Product
garrettdimon
PRO
301
110k
Teambox: Starting and Learning
jrom
128
8.4k
Distributed Sagas: A Protocol for Coordinating Microservices
caitiem20
321
20k
Navigating Team Friction
lara
177
13k
Sharpening the Axe: The Primacy of Toolmaking
bcantrill
15
1.4k
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]