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
6.6k
Quick and easy browser testing using RSpec and Rails 5.1
penelope_zone
1
82
Teaching RSpec to play nice with Rails
penelope_zone
2
140
Little machines that eat strings
penelope_zone
1
100
What is processor (brighton ruby edition)
penelope_zone
0
110
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
なぜテストマネージャの視点が 必要なのか? 〜 一歩先へ進むために 〜
moritamasami
0
240
JTCにおける内製×スクラム開発への挑戦〜内製化率95%達成の舞台裏/JTC's challenge of in-house development with Scrum
aeonpeople
0
260
2025/09/16 仕様駆動開発とAI-DLCが導くAI駆動開発の新フェーズ
masahiro_okamura
0
130
サラリーマンの小遣いで作るtoCサービス - Cloudflare Workersでスケールする開発戦略
shinaps
2
470
複数サービスを支えるマルチテナント型Batch MLプラットフォーム
lycorptech_jp
PRO
1
910
IoT x エッジAI - リアルタイ ムAI活用のPoCを今すぐ始め る方法 -
niizawat
0
120
Rustから学ぶ 非同期処理の仕組み
skanehira
1
150
ブロックテーマ時代における、テーマの CSS について考える Toro_Unit / 2025.09.13 @ Shinshu WordPress Meetup
torounit
0
130
Android Audio: Beyond Winning On It
atsushieno
0
2.4k
AWSを利用する上で知っておきたい名前解決のはなし(10分版)
nagisa53
10
3.2k
KotlinConf 2025_イベントレポート
sony
1
140
バイブスに「型」を!Kent Beckに学ぶ、AI時代のテスト駆動開発
amixedcolor
2
580
Featured
See All Featured
Distributed Sagas: A Protocol for Coordinating Microservices
caitiem20
333
22k
Rails Girls Zürich Keynote
gr2m
95
14k
The World Runs on Bad Software
bkeepers
PRO
70
11k
Building Adaptive Systems
keathley
43
2.7k
Writing Fast Ruby
sferik
628
62k
The MySQL Ecosystem @ GitHub 2015
samlambert
251
13k
Sharpening the Axe: The Primacy of Toolmaking
bcantrill
44
2.5k
A better future with KSS
kneath
239
17k
4 Signs Your Business is Dying
shpigford
184
22k
Visualizing Your Data: Incorporating Mongo into Loggly Infrastructure
mongodb
48
9.7k
The Power of CSS Pseudo Elements
geoffreycrofte
77
6k
Improving Core Web Vitals using Speculation Rules API
sergeychernyshev
18
1.1k
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]