Skip to main content

Google Guava's Predicates

So the other day I was working away on some rather tricky rules for validating an incoming identifier code. Like

999392304II+TJAJEIAJTI901119

or

EPFOOMNNVLLALOWEIITOE

Now, the system where this code is going is rather picky about what these codes should look like. (For the sake of this blog-post, I'll invent some business rules here on the fly, in reality they are a bit different, but the nature of them are the same):
  • A code cannot be null, or an empty string (of course)
  • If there are only letters (A-Z) in the code, it must be longer than 10 characters, but fewer than 20
  • On the other hand, if there are letters mixed with numbers, it must be exactly 10 or 15 characters
  • Numbers only are not allowed
  • No other symbols are allowed, but + signs are allowed, if the code starts with 999. In this case, the max length is 10.
Instead of just going straight for the if-else'ing my way through these rules, I implemented it using Predicates from Google Guava. I was pretty happy with the result, and wanted to put it up against what the classic solution would look like.

I've created a little project on Github that demonstrates the above rules. There are two branches:

ifelse -  The old imperative way, using if's and else's
predicate - The new functional way, using predicates

Both branches pass the same test suite. I won't swear on the correctness of the implementation, as it's currently 01:59 in the night, and the tests aren't really extensive.

Performance is not a big thing in this validation function. We're dealing with codes that come in every few seconds, so we've got plenty of milliseconds to spend on making the code look as nice as possible. Also, my regexp sucks, I know.

Here's a quick look of what I ended up with using if's and else's:

And here's using predicates:
(Source on Github)


In order to really appreciate the differences, it's best to have a look at the whole classes on Github. It's a Maven project, so you can import it into IDEA or Eclipse, and use Git to jump between the two branches for comparison.

I'm not saying that the predicates way is easier to read or write, but there is something functional and declarative about it that feels kind of.. powerful. A nice thing about those predicates is that they can easily be combined with eachother, and re-used in other places, like in filtering collections using other Guava utils.

Note that the full predicate style solution is much larger, but much to blame are those base-predicates I'm defining for saying matching, shorterThan, longerThan and exactLength.

If we were dealing with a language that properly supported functions (a predicate is a function that evalutes to true/false), it would probably look a lot nicer. Perhaps with Java 8, I can slim down the code quite a bit..

I just read that the Guava developers are going to include new fluent interfaces for combining predicates in a more elegant way, than the prefix style I've used above. Maybe something like

 new FluentPredicate().not(NULL_OR_EMPTY).and(ONLY_LETTERS).build(). 

Read more here about FluentPredicates, etc. They can't be too far away, release-wise.

For other Guava resources, check out my collection here.


Comments

  1. You might get some mileage out of CharMatcher for this particular task. I wonder if there's a Predicate wrapper that tests if a CharMatcher matches all characters in a string.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Personally, I found the predicates variant more intimidating and it required more concentration to cope with.

    In any case, there is an excellent opportunity for you to empirically evaluate which version is more maintainable: I found a bug that was present in both implementations.

    As I understand your description, the following test case should pass:

    assertFalse(isCodeAllowed("###########"));

    (I suspected that this was present based on the implementation of both isCodeAllowed methods)

    You could use this as an opportunity for comparing how long it takes to fix a bug in either version, which is a good proxy for "goodness" in this case.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Managing dot-files with vcsh and myrepos

Say I want to get my dot-files out on a new computer. Here's what I do:

# install vcsh & myrepos via apt/brew/etc
vcsh clone https://github.com/tfnico/config-mr.git mr
mr update

Done! All dot-files are ready to use and in place. No deploy command, no linking up symlinks to the files. No checking/out in my entire home directory as a Git repository. Yet, all my dot-files are neatly kept in fine-grained repositories, and any changes I make are immediately ready to be committed:

config-atom.git
    -> ~/.atom/*

config-mr.git
    -> ~/.mrconfig
    -> ~/.config/mr/*

config-tmuxinator.git  
    -> ~/.tmuxinator/*

config-vim.git
    -> ~/.vimrc
    -> ~/.vim/*

config-bin.git   
    -> ~/bin/*

config-git.git          
    -> ~/.gitconfig

config-tmux.git  
    -> ~/.tmux.conf    

config-zsh.git
    -> ~/.zshrc

How can this be? The key here is to use vcsh to keep track of your dot-files, and its partner myrepos/mr for operating on many repositories at the same time.

I discovere…

Encrypting and Decrypting with Spring

I was recently working with protecting some sensitive data in a typical Java application with a database underneath. We convert the data on its way out of the application using Spring Security Crypto Utilities. It "was decided" that we'd be doing AES with a key-length of 256, and this just happens to be the kind of encryption Spring crypto does out of the box. Sweet!

The big aber is that whatever JRE is running the application has to be patched with Oracle's JCE in order to do 256 bits. It's a fascinating story, the short version being that U.S. companies are restricted from exporting various encryption algorithms to certain countries, and some countries are restricted from importing them.

Once I had patched my JRE with the JCE, I found it fascinating how straight forward it was to encrypt and decrypt using the Spring Encryptors. So just for fun at the weekend, I threw together a little desktop app that will encrypt and decrypt stuff for the given password and sa…

The End of GitMinutes (my podcast)

I'm just about ship GitMinutes episode 46, which is going to be the final episode. I'll just paste the outro script here, as it sums up the sentimental thoughts pretty well:

I’m happy to have finally finished [publishing the last episodes from Git-Merge 2017], just in time before Git-Merge 2018 takes place in March. I won’t be going there myself, so I’m counting on someone else to pick up the mic there.

It’s sad to be shipping this one as it is probably the last GitMinutes episode ever. To go a bit down memory lane, 6 years ago, my daughter was born, and as I used a little of that paternity leave to set up my podcasting infrastructure and produce the first few episodes. Initially it was just going to be 10 episodes and call the experiment finished. Instead, I got to 46 episodes, the last dozen or so lazily tailing the last few Git-Merge conferences.

To every one of my guests, thank you so much again for coming on to share your passion in this little niche of computer science a…

Joining eyeo: A Year in Review

It's been well over a year since I joined eyeo. And 'tis the season for yearly reviews, so...

It's been pretty wild. So many times I thought "this stuff really deserves a bloggin", but then it was too inviting to grab onto the next thing and get that rolling.

Instead of taking a deep dive into some topic already, I want to scan through that year in review and think for myself, what were the big things, the important things, the things I achieved, and the things I learned. And then later on, if I ever get around to it, grab one of these topics and elaborate in a dedicated blog-post. Like a bucket-list of the blog posts that I should have written. Here goes:
How given no other structures, silos will grow by themselves This was my initial shock after joining the company. Only a few years after taking off as a startup, the hedges began growing, seemingly almost by themselves, and against the will of the founders. I've worked in silos, and in companies without the…

Working in Teams over Working as Individuals

I recentlypostedthis sketch on Twitter:

Thanks to a few mighty retweets, it gathered a lot of views (9000 impressions, whatever that means). While that's fun and all, I still felt a bit sad that such an awfully simple insight can garner much more popularity than a thorough blog post that I put some hours into.

So, rather than let Twitter get away with this, I'll steal my own content back into the blog :)

The thread went like this:

Pondering how to battle individualism in companies. For some, it is counter-intuitive that teams can be more responsive, faster and even more accountable than single individuals.

Having "teams" in place is no guarantee that team work is happening. Be wary of too large teams, "I/me/mine", personal contact details instead of team point of contact. Good team is sailing crew, not galley slaves.

Beware heroes, go-to persons, calling in favors and other shadow handling of work. Real teams make the work explicit, both requests/needs and re…