|
|
|
|
|
|
by bobwaycott
1046 days ago
|
|
|
If you’re having to do extra mental work to guess, it means you don’t have enough familiarity with the language, its type checks/guards, and the standard library. That’s not the language’s fault. If you want to check the type of a thing, you always want the matching `is_<type>`. It can be used anywhere in your code, including guards. There’s no guesswork involved here. That is the consistent rule. When you see a function with a `?`, look at the typespec and the function name—give it the argument(s) it expects and it will answer the question on the tin with a boolean. Again, there’s no guesswork. These functions can be used anywhere except guards—that is the consistent rule for boolean functions. > Is the thing I want to test written as a macro or not? I have never had to ask myself this question, and I struggle to parse it. Is the “thing” you want to test referring to the value or to the test you wish to perform on that value? Since you’re asking about macros, I’m assuming you mean the guard test. For that, just learn what guards are available[0] (you can also write your own :D ). [0]: https://hexdocs.pm/elixir/1.15.4/Kernel.html#guards |
|
|
Depends. In this case there are definite rule in place which you can learn. Overall, that's definitely language's fault. On other note, Elixir actually very good at consistent naming
- standard library is designed, not meshed up and grew layer by layer like js/php abomination (erlang one is not consistent and it leaks sometimes)
- Pipe operator by its mere presence enforces correct order of arguments, even in 3rd party code