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
54
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
570
How RSpec Works
penelope_zone
0
6.7k
Quick and easy browser testing using RSpec and Rails 5.1
penelope_zone
1
89
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
360
extremely defensive coding - rubyconf edition
penelope_zone
0
270
Agile, etc.
penelope_zone
2
230
Other Decks in Technology
See All in Technology
re:Invent 2025の見どころと便利アイテムをご紹介 / Highlights and Useful Items for re:Invent 2025
yuj1osm
0
380
AIエージェントによる業務効率化への飽くなき挑戦-AWS上の実開発事例から学んだ効果、現実そしてギャップ-
nasuvitz
5
1.4k
AWSが好きすぎて、41歳でエンジニアになり、AAIを経由してAWSパートナー企業に入った話
yama3133
2
190
AWS re:Invent 2025事前勉強会資料 / AWS re:Invent 2025 pre study meetup
kinunori
0
830
dbtとAIエージェントを組み合わせて見えたデータ調査の新しい形
10xinc
7
1.5k
From Natural Language to K8s Operations: The MCP Architecture and Practice of kubectl-ai
appleboy
0
370
Raycast AI APIを使ってちょっと便利なAI拡張機能を作ってみた
kawamataryo
0
180
激動の時代を爆速リチーミングで乗り越えろ
sansantech
PRO
1
180
Behind Postgres 18: The People, the Code, & the Invisible Work | Claire Giordano | PGConfEU 2025
clairegiordano
0
160
コンパウンド組織のCRE #cre_meetup
layerx
PRO
1
290
AI駆動で進める依存ライブラリ更新 ─ Vue プロジェクトの品質向上と開発スピード改善の実践録
sayn0
1
340
SRE × マネジメントレイヤーが挑戦した組織・会社のオブザーバビリティ改革 ― ビジネス価値と信頼性を両立するリアルな挑戦
coconala_engineer
0
300
Featured
See All Featured
The Language of Interfaces
destraynor
162
25k
Thoughts on Productivity
jonyablonski
71
4.9k
Designing Experiences People Love
moore
142
24k
Save Time (by Creating Custom Rails Generators)
garrettdimon
PRO
32
1.7k
[RailsConf 2023 Opening Keynote] The Magic of Rails
eileencodes
31
9.7k
Faster Mobile Websites
deanohume
310
31k
Product Roadmaps are Hard
iamctodd
PRO
55
11k
The Art of Delivering Value - GDevCon NA Keynote
reverentgeek
16
1.7k
Code Reviewing Like a Champion
maltzj
526
40k
Art, The Web, and Tiny UX
lynnandtonic
303
21k
Rails Girls Zürich Keynote
gr2m
95
14k
Large-scale JavaScript Application Architecture
addyosmani
514
110k
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]