Created
July 14, 2011 08:21
-
-
Save paneq/1082096 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Which version do you prefere?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| require 'test/unit' | |
| class KeyTest < Test::Unit::TestCase | |
| def test_key | |
| object = Object.new | |
| assert_equal(:submit, object_key(object)) | |
| def object.persisted?; true end | |
| assert_equal(:update, object_key(object)) | |
| def object.persisted?; false end | |
| assert_equal(:create, object_key(object)) | |
| end | |
| end |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| def object_key | |
| if @object && @object.respond_to?(:persisted?) | |
| @object.persisted? ? :update : :create | |
| else | |
| :submit | |
| end | |
| end |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| def object_key | |
| return :submit unless @object && @object.respond_to?(:persisted?) | |
| return @object.persisted? ? :update : :create | |
| end |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| def object_key | |
| # assume that nil does not respond to :persisted? and if it does, then respect that | |
| return :submit unless @object.respond_to?(:persisted?) | |
| return @object.persisted? ? :update : :create | |
| end |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| def object_key | |
| if @object && @object.respond_to?(:persisted?) && @object.persisted? | |
| :update | |
| elsif @object && @object.respond_to?(:persisted?) | |
| :create | |
| else | |
| :submit | |
| end | |
| end |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| def object_key | |
| return :submit if ! persistable?(@object) | |
| return :update if ! @object.persisted? | |
| return :create if @object.persisted? | |
| end | |
| def persistable?(object) | |
| object && object.respond_to?(:persisted?) | |
| end |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| def object_key | |
| return :submit unless @object.respond_to?(:persisted?) | |
| return :update if @object.persisted? | |
| return :create | |
| end |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| persisted = @object.respond_to?(:persisted?) ? @object.persisted? : nil | |
| case persisted | |
| when true then :update | |
| when false then :create | |
| else :submit | |
| end |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| def object_key(object) | |
| object.persisted? ? :update : :create | |
| rescue; :submit | |
| end |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| def object_key(object) | |
| object.persisted? ? :update : :create rescue NoMethodError :submit | |
| end |
V06. In 05 the ! are easy to oversee.
Both follow a beautifull because they are most readible
After one day of thinking I also prefer v05 with the same remark as pzol added - ! is easy to oversee. Maybe using "not" keyword would help with readability.
What do you think about v08 - using exceptions?
You can also write as:
return :submit unless persistable?(@object)
return :update unless @object.persisted?
return :create
I'm using Ruby since 2004 and every time I see "unless" in the code I have to stop, compile it to "if not", think and then go on ;)
I like it... But true... Mixing if and unless takes a little more time to think
Raising exceptions is to costly and shoudl not be used for flow (even throw catch are rarely used in ruby)
Piotr
…On 15 lip 2011, at 13:13, ***@***.*** wrote:
I'm using Ruby since 2004 and every time I see "unless" in the code I have to stop, compile it to "if not", think and then go on ;)
##
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://gist.github.com/1082096
Premature optimization...
I have seen this flow argument many times - why exactly exceptions can't be used when controlling the flow?
The example above is not the best one as it catches NoMethodError which is a bit extrem, but sometimes it's nice to raise ProductNotAvailable. If you're not using exceptions then you end up with lots of ifs on the client side. I prefer the "Tell, Don't Ask" approach.
I am not following the 'ifs on the client side, do u have an example?
Exceptions are good to go all the way up the call stack, is that what u mean?
Piotr
…On 15 lip 2011, at 13:28, ***@***.*** wrote:
Premature optimization...
I have seen this flow argument many times - why exactly exceptions can't be used when controlling the flow?
The example above is not the best one as it catches NoMethodError which is a bit extrem, but sometimes it's nice to raise ProductNotAvailable. If you're not using exceptions then you end up with lots of ifs on the client side. I prefer the "Tell, Don't Ask" approach.
##
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://gist.github.com/1082096
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I bet on v05. Clean, beauty and most readable.