i followed up on the explicit getter

Question

< enough analyst 54434> i followed up on the explicit getter thing

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

and it looked like <https github com pantsbuild pants compare master stuhood stuhood black setup with explicit getters> for black setup

enough-analyst-54434 · Answer

Yeah

enough-analyst-54434 · Answer

I have always liked this better but I m looking for what you all think

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

which isn t great i think i thought that there would be more opportunity to give better names but in this case at least it was boilerplate

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

because you re probably going to name it a variant of the types

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

or that would be a convention

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

but un enforced

enough-analyst-54434 · Answer

I ll let you all decide I d happily trade the ast parsing for explicit injection like that

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

from a user perspective i don t see the benefit it s simpler to implement of course and i haven t touched that code in a long time so maybe that s justified but

enough-analyst-54434 · Answer

As a clearly odd user I like that I have just rules now and my dependencies are explicit on those rules more clear you re asking for a rule when named GetRule It s clear others don t feel this way I think

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

i think the flip side of that is that my function has a lot of arguments is maybe not something that users count as a benefit perhaps they would prefer global singletons for example

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

you removed most of the boilerplate of having function arguments by killing the ` rule selectors ` syntax which was awesome

enough-analyst-54434 · Answer

I think my function has alot of arguments is a good smell pushback

enough-analyst-54434 · Answer

It should be easier to factor out functions

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

yea and without all of the dependencies of the function being literally in the arguments you have to say it differently lots of dependencies rather than lots of arguments

enough-analyst-54434 · Answer

Basically this all reads exactly like constructor DI in java to me with Guice and that was exactly a good smell to react to

enough-analyst-54434 · Answer

This rule does way too much

witty-crayon-22786 · Answer

i just think that in this case the cost of the forced boilerplate is higher than the benefit someone sniffing for rule is too big can still count args+gets to apply their lint

enough-analyst-54434 · Answer

k