Refactor part processing (remove PartProcessor) #31
Conversation
This file contains 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
matthewmcgarvey
changed the title
jwoertink
reviewed
Aug 5, 2020
| def process_parts(parts : Array(String), method : String, payload : T) | ||
| PartProcessor(T).new(self, parts: parts, method: method, payload: payload).run | ||
| self | ||
| leaf_fragment = parts.reduce(self) { |fragment, part| fragment.add_part(part) } |
jwoertink
approved these changes
Aug 6, 2020
paulcsmith
reviewed
Aug 10, 2020
src/lucky_router/fragment.cr
Outdated
| name: part[1...], | ||
| fragment: Fragment(T).new | ||
| ) | ||
| return dynamic_fragment.fragment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For some reason my brain has a really hard time following early returns. Could this be refactored to use conditionals and implicit returns instead?
src/lucky_router/fragment.cr
Outdated
Comment on lines
73
to
76
| dynamic_fragment = self.dynamic_part ||= DynamicFragment(T).new( | ||
| name: part[1...], | ||
| fragment: Fragment(T).new | ||
| ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It took me awhile to figure out what what this was doing and why and then realized it was removing the first character which is the :. Thoughts on adding this explaining variable to clarify what it is doing?
Suggested change
| dynamic_fragment = self.dynamic_part ||= DynamicFragment(T).new( | |
| name: part[1...], | |
| fragment: Fragment(T).new | |
| ) | |
| part_without_colon = part[1..] | |
| dynamic_fragment = self.dynamic_part ||= DynamicFragment(T).new( | |
| name: part_without_colon, | |
| fragment: Fragment(T).new | |
| ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This kind of thing is why I want to wrap the part strings in a part class.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah I was thinking that when I read your comment. That will be a really awesome refactor 👍 Nice idea
|
@paulcsmith I have implemented your changes |
paulcsmith
approved these changes
Aug 10, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
This change removes the
PartProcessorclass completely and moves the logic into theFragmentclass. I believe this brings clarity to the codebase as the logic using the processor required passing in the fragment and all of the passed in information anyways and it was calling methods on the fragment. Along with the move of logic, two changes were made:.reducecall on the array of parts. Besides being easier to understand (I hope), it is responsible for the majority of the speed up below.add_partmethod so that at the higher level ofprocess_partsthere is no difference.Benchmark (with
--release)