Cherry-picking Specific Active Support Behavior

The Active Support library has always (or, close enough to always) allowed us to cherry-pick specific extensions/behaviors, to load only strictly needed dependencies. That is, rather than loading the entirety of the library, we can load just the bits and pieces we need. This helps keep the amount of things loaded in memory smaller, and faster by doing less work. It can also aide in understanding by making more explicit the dependencies some code relies on.

I’ve been using this technique for years, and it’s been solid. Until today, while working on a Rails 7 code base, when I started seeing an error:

uninitialized constant ActiveSupport::IsolatedExecutionState (NameError)

As it happens, what I’d been doing for years worked, but more by accident than design. Active Support 7 has fixed the glitch.

Read on →

A Rails 7 compatible bin/dev for heroku local

Rails 7 introduced a new bin/dev wrapper to launch and manage your Rails server, CSS watcher, and JS bundler into a single process, managed by foreman. This is quite handy for running everything with a single command. But what if you’re deploying to Heroku and using the Heroku CLI’s heroku local to run things locally? Or if you’re a fan of one of the other tools that manage processes based on your Procfile?

I’ve got you covered!

bin/dev for heroku local

The biggest, and most obvious change is swapping out the executable. Mostly this is to do with heroku local using the :<subcommand> style CLI interface. Let’s compare foreman, heroku local, and bin/dev doing similar things to see how their CLIs differ.

# start the web and css processes
$ foreman start web,css
$ heroku local:start web,css
$ bin/dev web,css

It turns out bin/dev explicitly calls the foreman start command. So a quick heroku local version of the same would be:

Read on →

Verbose Shell Scripts for Future You

Command line tools and shell builtins can offer both a short- and long-form way to specify options. Sometimes these are also called short and long flags, respectively. The upshot is a user experience with two ways to specify the same option. A short and terse way. And a longer, more verbose way.

$ curl -HLsS http://stevenharman.net
# ⬆ is the same as ⬇
$ curl --head --location --silent --show-error http://stevenharman.net

Both ways are useful, neither right nor wrong, and each with their own trade offs to consider.

Why Both?

Meme: Girl shrugging and asking, "Why don't we have both?" Why are there two ways to say the same thing?

It’s a good question. One I’ve asked too. But I’ve not found a definitive answer. Perhaps the truth is lost to history at this point?

From what I can tell, originally (i.e., the early/original *nix flavored OSes) there were only single-character options. At some point multi-character options were added, possibly via GNU.

Along the way the sheer number of options also grew, a lot. Is this a cause and effect relationship, a correlation, or pure happenstance? I don’t know. But today we have A LOT of options, and often multiple ways to express them.

Let’s talk about the trade offs and when to use each style.

Read on →

Well-behaved Ruby Objects: Equality

A “well-behaved” object in Ruby needs to understand the following:

What makes two Ruby objects “equal”?
And which version of “equal” (there are several in Ruby)?
And what makes an object usable as a Hash key?
And is that the same thing that makes them Comparable?

Because I can never seem to remember the specifics. And because my searching the Interwebs seems to find related, but not specific help. And because I’ve got this blurgh-thing… I might as well use it to help future-me (and maybe you?).

Gimme the gist

Implement hash and eql? for use as a Hash key, and then alias the eql? method to == for the expected developer ergonomics. Something like this:

class Message
  attr_reader :body, :subject

  def initialize(subject:, body:)
    @subject = subject
    @body = body
  end

  def eql?(other)
    other.class == self.class &&
      other.body == body &&
      other.subject == subject
  end
  alias == eql?

  def hash
    body.hash ^ subject.hash
  end
end

What to know more about the specifics, or how to also make these objects Comparable? Read on, friend…

Read on →

Debugging Homebrew with Pry

Over the years I’ve written a few Homebrew formulas and sent the occasional Pull Request to update a formula or two. But I’ve never done any work within Homebrew. I’ve never needed to debug how Homebrew itself worked. Until now.

I assumed our typical Ruby debugging tools, like Pry and Pry-Byebug would work. Homebrew is just Ruby, after all. Which is true. But it’s also a bit special, and we can’t do the normal require "pry-byebug"; binding.pry tricks.

But we can, with a little poking around, still use those tools!

Read on →

In Search Of… Enumerable#transform for Ruby

In Search Of… a Ruby method with the semantics of Enumerable#map and Enumerable#inject. That is, to transform values while also having access to the prior iteration return value. Sounds odd, I know.

Given the following “value object”

class Snapshot
  def initialize(value = 0)
    @value = value
  end

  def apply(new_value)
    self.class.new(@value + new_value)
  end
end

I want to build an array of snapshots, based on some set of inputs. Meaning, I think I’d like something that looks like this

(1..10).transform(Snapshot.new) { |prev_snap, i|
  prev_snap.apply(i)
}

Resulting in this

#=> [#<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d12558 @value=1>,
#=>  #<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d12508 @value=3>,
#=>  #<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d124e0 @value=6>,
#=>  #<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d124b8 @value=10>,
#=>  #<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d12468 @value=15>,
#=>  #<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d12440 @value=21>,
#=>  #<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d12418 @value=28>,
#=>  #<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d123c8 @value=36>,
#=>  #<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d123a0 @value=45>,
#=>  #<Snapshot:0x00007fe550d12378 @value=55>]

Right now, as of Ruby 2.5, I don’t know of a clean way of doing that. Clean being in the eye of the beholder, I suppose. It can be done with Enumerable#map or Enumerable#inject, but it ain’t pretty.

Read on →

Reclaim Your Domain Model from Rails

TL,DR; When building an application using Rails, I prefer to keep all my model in app/models/. I reserve lib/ for those other things - those not-my-domain-things. I’d like to explain the what and why.

Boundaries Amongst the Fields; Deep Greens Rails has a history of co-opting names, as happened when the ActiveRecord library used the active record pattern name. A similar co-opting has happened with the MVC pattern wherein many believe Rails is an example of the MVC design pattern. In truth, it’s probably closer to MVC Model 2… but I digress.

Model View What’s-that-now?

MVC stands for Model, View, Controller. In Rails-land we know what the Controllers are. And while we don’t have Views in the way that MVC meant, we do have view-templates, and we call those our views. The Model is meant to be all the things it takes to model our problem domain. As applied to Rails, the Model seems the most misunderstood/misused of the MVC triumvirate.

Read on →

The No Man's Land of Web Development

I think about the current state of web development experiences as a continuum. On one end we have traditional Rails-era web apps - full page loads, with bits of dynamism haphazardly mixed in. On the other are rich client-side JavaScript apps with their own structure and life cycles, standing alone and/or talking to an HTTP API.

No Man's Land Flanders Field France 1919.

Rails-era web apps have some great tooling and deliver a pretty nice development experience. The shift toward rich client-side web experiences has lead to some great tooling that makes for a 1st-class web development experience.

A no man’s land

Between these two approaches lies a no man’s land. The tooling and techniques are focused largely on either end of the continuum despite the large population of apps living in the middle.

Read on →

Git Clean: Delete Already-Merged Branches

TL;DR

To delete local branches which have already been merged into main:

$ git branch --merged main | grep -v "\* main" | xargs -n 1 git branch -d

You can omit the main branch argument to remove local branches which have already been merged into the current HEAD:

$ git branch --merged | grep -v "\*" | xargs -n 1 git branch -d

Breaking it down

We start by getting a list of local branches which have already been merged into the current branch (i.e. HEAD)

$ git branch --merged

  add_new_user_gravatar_links
  assign_unique_key_to_uploads
* main
  remember_the_last_activity_per_user
  update_kaminari_to_thread_safe_version

We then pipe that to grep to match on the "\*" character, inverting that match via -v to get all merged branches sans the current one.

$ git branch --merged | grep -v "\*"

  add_new_user_gravatar_links
  assign_unique_key_to_uploads
  remember_the_last_activity_per_user
  update_kaminari_to_thread_safe_version

Finally we pipe that list in to xargs so we can strip apart the input and pass it on to a new command. We use -n 1 to ensure at most one argument is taken from the input to be passed to the invocation of the new command. The resulting commands that xargs will invoke are effectively

$ git branch -d add_new_user_gravatar_links
$ git branch -d assign_unique_key_to_uploads
$ git branch -d remember_the_last_activity_per_user
$ git branch -d update_kaminari_to_thread_safe_version

Pulling it all back together, we have

$ git branch --merged | grep -v "\*" | xargs -n 1 git branch -d

Deleted branch add_new_user_gravatar_links
Deleted branch assign_unique_key_to_uploads
Deleted branch remember_the_last_activity_per_user
Deleted branch update_kaminari_to_thread_safe_version

And there you have it. Go forth and clean up!

Bag of Methods Module and Grep-driven Development

Always looking for more concise ways to express ideas, I’d like to present two terms for your consideration.

BOMM |bäm| (abbreviation)
Bag of Methods Module
An anti-pattern for "sharing behavior" or "separating concerns" of an object. In practice such modules often contain code that is related in name or function, but lacking a cohesive purpose. See also: GDD.
GDD (initialism)
Grep-driven Development
A software development process that relies on searching full source code to find usages of methods and deduce intended behavior of a piece of code. Often caused by lack of coherent and cohesive design. See also: BOMM.

Thanks to fellow Highgroover, Andy Lindeman, for helping me to finally define these terms. Or at least, refine them.