uohzxela / clean-code-ruby Goto Github PK
View Code? Open in Web Editor NEW๐ Clean Code concepts adapted for Ruby
License: MIT License
๐ Clean Code concepts adapted for Ruby
License: MIT License
Hi,
Under the "Test" section you write : "There's no excuse to not write tests. Ruby comes with its own testing tool (RSpec) built right in.". I guess you meant Minitest ?
Great work, thanks !
Cheers.
Many of the code samples are not idiomatic. We should use RuboCop to make them conform to existing community-driven style.
The empty strings are not falsy in Ruby
Hi @uohzxela
Thanks for your good contents. It is really helpful.
But I have a question about Methods should do one thing
Bad:
def email_clients(clients)
clients.each do |client|
client_record = database.lookup(client)
email(client) if client_record.active?
end
end
email_clients(clients)
Good:
def email_clients(clients)
clients.each { |client| email(client) }
end
def active_clients(clients)
clients.select { |client| active_client?(client) }
end
def active_client?(client)
client_record = database.lookup(client)
client_record.active?
end
email_clients(active_clients(clients))
It seems Good code is more clear but if we use this code, we have to loop all clients twice.
But first Bad code only loops clients once.
So Bad code is faster than Good code.
What do you think?
I think the local variable in the method split_into_first_and_last_name is different from the one name = 'Ryan McDermott' . So it will not affect the outside name variable's value.
DRY is more prevailing than removing duplicate code.
Method names should say what they do
Poorly named methods add to the code reviewer's cognitive load at best, and mislead the code reviewer at worst. Strive to capture** the the
**precise intent when naming methods.
Hi,
I really like this repo. I can see it being immensely useful when working on PR reviews in my company. Instead of explaining something I can simply link to a section in this repo.
Similarly to eg ruby-style-guide what do you think about creating a standalone github organization for this repo? The full link to this repo would be something like: https://github.com/clean-code-ruby/clean-code-ruby
. I think this would be really nice and give this repo a nice, "official touch".
In ruby:
a = nil || 'a'
=> 'a'
a = false || 'a'
=> 'a'
The function arguments section talks about rarely using over two arguments in a single method. We should probably give an example that doesn't use four arguments.
Bad:
-def create_menu(title, body, button_text, cancellable)
+def create_menu(title, body)
# ...
end
Good:
-def create_menu(title:, body:, button_text:, cancellable:)
+def create_menu(title:, body:)
# ...
end
-create_menu(
- title: 'Foo',
- body: 'Bar',
- button_text: 'Baz',
- cancellable: true
-)
+create_menu(title: 'Foo', body: 'Bar')
Would be happy to push up a PR for the above :)
I don't disagree with the sentiment here, but Favor functional programming over imperative programming states that "Functional languages are cleaner and easier to test".
The test for the example doesn't change between implementations, so doesn't give the reader an indication of why functional style is easier to test.
require 'minitest/autorun'
class FunctionalVsImperativeTest < Minitest::Test
def test_imperative
calculator = Imperative.new
assert_equal(calculator.calculate(test_data), 3150)
end
def test_functional
calculator = Functional.new
assert_equal(calculator.calculate(test_data), 3150)
end
private
def test_data
[ { name: 'Uncle Bobby',
lines_of_code: 500 },
{ name: 'Suzie Q',
lines_of_code: 1500 },
{ name: 'Jimmy Gosling',
lines_of_code: 150 },
{ name: 'Grace Hopper',
lines_of_code: 1000 } ]
end
end
class Imperative
def calculate(programmer_output)
total_output = 0
programmer_output.each do |output|
total_output += output[:lines_of_code]
end
total_output
end
end
class Functional
INITIAL_VALUE = 0
def calculate(programmer_output)
programmer_output.sum(INITIAL_VALUE) { |output| output[:lines_of_code] }
end
end
I've seen that you have used Functions
as a term in several places, that's not really correct.
In Ruby it isn't possible to execute a piece of code that isn't defined on an object, because there is nothing in Ruby that is not an object - this way, strictly speaking, a concept of a function does not exist, there are only methods.
I noticed there was no description under Function names should say what they do. I'd like to suggest something like the following:
### Function names should say what they do
Poorly named methods add to the code reviewer's cognitive load at best, and mislead the
code reviewer at worst. Strive to capture the the precise intent when naming methods.
"However, you have to be aware that in some situations, using attr_accessor is a code smell, read more here." Check this link, ASAP!
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
๐ Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
A PHP framework for web artisans
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. ๐๐๐
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
Google โค๏ธ Open Source for everyone.
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
Data-Driven Documents codes.
China tencent open source team.