jm + monkey-patching   2

On Ruby
The horrors of monkey-patching:
I call out the Honeybadger gem specifically because was the most recent time I'd been bit by a seemingly good thing promoted in the community: monkey patching third party code. Now I don't fault Honeybadger for making their product this way. It provides their customers with direct business value: "just require 'honeybadger' and you're done!" I don't agree with this sort of practice. [....]

I distrust everything [in Ruby] but a small set of libraries I've personally vetted or are authored by people I respect. Why is this important? Without a certain level of scrutiny you will introduce odd and hard to reproduce bugs. This is especially important because Ruby offers you absolutely zero guarantee whatever the state your program is when a given method is dispatched. Constants are not constants. Methods can be redefined at run time. Someone could have written a time sensitive monkey patch to randomly undefined methods from anything in ObjectSpace because they can. This example is so horribly bad that no one should every do, but the programming language allows this. Much worse, this code be arbitrarily inject by some transitive dependency (do you even know what yours are?).
ruby  monkey-patching  coding  reliability  bugs  dependencies  libraries  honeybadger  sinatra 
april 2015 by jm
'a HTTP client mock library for Python, 100% inspired on ruby's FakeWeb [ ].' 'HTTPretty monkey patches Python's socket core module, reimplementing the HTTP protocol by mocking requests and responses.'
mocking  testing  http  python  ruby  unit-tests  tests  monkey-patching 
january 2013 by jm

Copy this bookmark: