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
Sponsored
·
SiteGround - Reliable hosting with speed, security, and support you can count on.
→
Penelope Phippen
September 12, 2014
Technology
65
1
Share
My Problem, My Solution
A talk about typing I gave at Frozen Rails 2014
Penelope Phippen
September 12, 2014
More Decks by Penelope Phippen
See All by Penelope Phippen
Introducing Rubyfmt
penelope_zone
0
610
How RSpec Works
penelope_zone
0
6.8k
Quick and easy browser testing using RSpec and Rails 5.1
penelope_zone
1
110
Teaching RSpec to play nice with Rails
penelope_zone
2
170
Little machines that eat strings
penelope_zone
1
130
What is processor (brighton ruby edition)
penelope_zone
0
140
What is processor?
penelope_zone
1
380
extremely defensive coding - rubyconf edition
penelope_zone
0
290
Agile, etc.
penelope_zone
2
250
Other Decks in Technology
See All in Technology
自称宇宙最速で不合格となったAIP-C01にリベンジを果たすべくAIで問題集アプリを作ってみた。
yama3133
0
240
Oracle AI Database@AWS:サービス概要のご紹介
oracle4engineer
PRO
4
2.7k
AI フレンドリーなエラー監視を TypeScript で実現する
shinyaigeek
2
160
イベントで大活躍する電子ペーパー名札 〜その3〜 / ビジュアルプログラミングIoTLT vol.23
you
PRO
0
160
コードレビューを制するチームがソフトウェアデリバリーのフローを制す / Beyond Code Review: Distributing Its Responsibilities Across the SDLC
mtx2s
1
350
Datadog 認定試験の概要と対策
uechishingo
0
180
はじめてのDatadog
kairim0
0
210
OpenClawとHermesAgentでAI新入社員を作った話
takanoriyanada
0
140
Spring Boot における AOT Cache 活用テクニックと 起動時間改善事例
ntt_dsol_java
0
170
速さだけじゃない! VoidZero ツールが移行先に選ばれる理由
mizdra
PRO
6
660
脅威をエンジニアリングの糧にして:恐怖を乗り越えた先にあったもの / Turn threats into fuel for engineering: what lay beyond overcoming fear
nrslib
1
340
AI駆動開発でなんでもハンズオン環境をつくってみた
yoshimi0227
0
170
Featured
See All Featured
Why Your Marketing Sucks and What You Can Do About It - Sophie Logan
marketingsoph
0
160
How to build a perfect <img>
jonoalderson
1
5.5k
Building a A Zero-Code AI SEO Workflow
portentint
PRO
0
540
Java REST API Framework Comparison - PWX 2021
mraible
34
9.3k
Groundhog Day: Seeking Process in Gaming for Health
codingconduct
0
190
技術選定の審美眼(2025年版) / Understanding the Spiral of Technologies 2025 edition
twada
PRO
118
120k
Lightning talk: Run Django tests with GitHub Actions
sabderemane
0
190
Distributed Sagas: A Protocol for Coordinating Microservices
caitiem20
333
22k
sira's awesome portfolio website redesign presentation
elsirapls
0
260
Product Roadmaps are Hard
iamctodd
PRO
55
12k
Efficient Content Optimization with Google Search Console & Apps Script
katarinadahlin
PRO
1
580
Designing for Timeless Needs
cassininazir
1
230
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]