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
260
Agile, etc.
penelope_zone
2
220
Other Decks in Technology
See All in Technology
GMOペパボのデータ基盤とデータ活用の現在地 / Current State of GMO Pepabo's Data Infrastructure and Data Utilization
zaimy
3
210
反脆弱性(アンチフラジャイル)とデータ基盤構築
cuebic9bic
3
170
Claude Codeが働くAI中心の業務システム構築の挑戦―AIエージェント中心の働き方を目指して
os1ma
9
2.5k
Rubyの国のPerlMonger
anatofuz
3
730
Findy Freelance 利用シーン別AI活用例
ness
0
420
生成AIによるデータサイエンスの変革
taka_aki
0
2.9k
データモデリング通り #2オンライン勉強会 ~方法論の話をしよう~
datayokocho
0
150
Nx × AI によるモノレポ活用 〜コードジェネレーター編〜
puku0x
0
480
Google Agentspaceを実際に導入した効果と今後の展望
mixi_engineers
PRO
3
400
AIに頼りすぎない新人育成術
cuebic9bic
3
230
リモートワークで心掛けていること 〜AI活用編〜
naoki85
0
140
隙間時間で爆速開発! Claude Code × Vibe Coding で作るマニュアル自動生成サービス
akitomonam
3
260
Featured
See All Featured
Into the Great Unknown - MozCon
thekraken
40
2k
Embracing the Ebb and Flow
colly
86
4.8k
StorybookのUI Testing Handbookを読んだ
zakiyama
30
6k
Scaling GitHub
holman
461
140k
Cheating the UX When There Is Nothing More to Optimize - PixelPioneers
stephaniewalter
283
13k
Improving Core Web Vitals using Speculation Rules API
sergeychernyshev
18
1.1k
Designing for humans not robots
tammielis
253
25k
How to Create Impact in a Changing Tech Landscape [PerfNow 2023]
tammyeverts
53
2.9k
Evolution of real-time – Irina Nazarova, EuRuKo, 2024
irinanazarova
8
880
Making the Leap to Tech Lead
cromwellryan
134
9.5k
Fight the Zombie Pattern Library - RWD Summit 2016
marcelosomers
234
17k
How to Ace a Technical Interview
jacobian
278
23k
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]