14 ms·

Postgres has a built in function that converts strings into lowercase. Why not use that? This seems like an extremely convoluted way of performing the example t

Postgres has a built in function that converts strings into lowercase. Why not use that? This seems like an extremely convoluted way of performing the example task. One could suppose that it's just a contrived simple example to show the point, but the headline suggests otherwise.

stevebmark 3y ago
The best part is the map that not only mutates its own arguments, but also mutates the arguments to the function, which all is in a "service" which has to be instantiated and then "called." I really wish the Rails community would pick up best practices from other languages.
- Toutouxc 3y ago
  This. I think that the Rails community is slowly forgetting how to actually write Ruby, and reinventing known and tried OOP patterns using as little OOP as possible — in a purely object-oriented language! I’m working on a codebase where someone had the amazing idea to implement some of the multi-model business logic using the “Interactor” gem. I’ve just spent two days rewriting one of these interactor abominations into a simple 250 LOC module of module_function-ed methods with clear dependencies and data flow, as a temporary solution to be able to see what’s even happening there and build some actual domain models from it. I can’t imagine anyone with some CS background and a bit of experience with other languages to look at the interactor stuff and go: omg this is perfect, exactly what this codebase needs. It’s like a normal Ruby class but it: - hides all instance variables into an opaque “context” bag - has methods which don’t take arguments (they reach into the “context” bag instead) - has methods that don’t have return values (side effects go into the “context” bag) - has no constructor and just chucks everything you pass to #new into the “context” bag - is not understood by RubyMine, arguably the most intelligent Ruby IDE, at all

stevebmark 3y ago

The best part is the map that not only mutates its own arguments, but also mutates the arguments to the function, which all is in a "service" which has to be instantiated and then "called." I really wish the Rails community would pick up best practices from other languages.

Toutouxc 3y ago
This. I think that the Rails community is slowly forgetting how to actually write Ruby, and reinventing known and tried OOP patterns using as little OOP as possible — in a purely object-oriented language! I’m working on a codebase where someone had the amazing idea to implement some of the multi-model business logic using the “Interactor” gem. I’ve just spent two days rewriting one of these interactor abominations into a simple 250 LOC module of module_function-ed methods with clear dependencies and data flow, as a temporary solution to be able to see what’s even happening there and build some actual domain models from it. I can’t imagine anyone with some CS background and a bit of experience with other languages to look at the interactor stuff and go: omg this is perfect, exactly what this codebase needs. It’s like a normal Ruby class but it: - hides all instance variables into an opaque “context” bag - has methods which don’t take arguments (they reach into the “context” bag instead) - has methods that don’t have return values (side effects go into the “context” bag) - has no constructor and just chucks everything you pass to #new into the “context” bag - is not understood by RubyMine, arguably the most intelligent Ruby IDE, at all