nix2intel

nix2intel

I just finished the first iteration of my first Elixir project. I’m still super new to all of this and would love feedback, pull requests, etc. The code is available here GitHub - osintowl/builtwith: Builtwith API wrapper written in Elixir · GitHub and the documentation is here on hex builtwith. I would love to know if I’m doing dumb things, if there are different ways I should approach the problems, etc. I love elixir so far but still trying to grok it as python has been my main programming language for years.

Showing Posts 1 to 10

dimitarvp

dimitarvp

To start with, I’d use Req and not HttpPoison.

Also the Map.get function calls you could just replace with pattern-matching IMO.

D4no0

D4no0

Maybe Req is now the cool kid in town, however HttpPoison is a battle-tested library that was long before req was created, I use it a lot even to this day. Personally I would just decouple the http client and have a default implementation with whatever is easier to use these days.

nix2intel

nix2intel OP

Could you describe more what this would look like in this case? right now it kind of looks like this:
Builtwith.make_request(domain: example.com bwpass: api_token_here)

and then it handles building the string in the backend in this case using httpoison. I just want to make sure i’m writing elixiy code and not python code in elixir :smiley:

nix2intel

nix2intel OP

Are there any good resources you could point me to for pattern matching? This is a fairly new concept to me. I’d love to not have to do map finds in enum statements to get a map that I can pull out top level items from the json.

arcyfelix

arcyfelix

Just out of curiosity - what is your argument for one, not the other?

D4no0

D4no0

Instead of using HttpPoison directly in your codebase, you can define a generic http client interface that is fully configurable.

Here is an example of a interface: lib/ssl_moon/network/http/http_client.ex · main · SSL MOON / SSL MOON · GitLab
And implementation: lib/ssl_moon/network/http/http_client_impl.ex · main · SSL MOON / SSL MOON · GitLab

If you plan on using that code, don’t mind the logic related to redirects as that is irrelevant in your case.

muelthe

muelthe

on the topic of pattern matching, from the docs:

And personally, I really like this source as well:

seeplusplus

seeplusplus

AFAIK it’s not advisable to check in the doc directory. It is ignored by the .gitignore generated by ElixirLS; gitignore/Elixir.gitignore at main · github/gitignore · GitHub.

seeplusplus

seeplusplus

Some other general feedback (not Elixir specific, hope that’s ok):

Improve names

  • Method names like make_request can feel obvious in the moment you are writing the code, but don’t truly communicate what they are doing. Instead, consider lookup_by_domain.

Do one thing

  • Most of the get_ methods are doing more than one thing, for example:
 def get_subdomains(builtwithjson) do
      get_results(builtwithjson)
      |> Enum.find(fn map -> Map.has_key?(map, "Result") end)
      |> case do
        nil ->
          nil
        subdomains ->
        Map.get(subdomains, "Result")
        |> Map.get("Paths")
        |> Enum.map(fn x -> Map.get(x, "SubDomain") end)
        |> Enum.reject(&(&1 == ""))
      end
  end

You are getting the first result from a list of results and getting the SubDomain from it. I know most likely the first result of the list is probably the correct one, otherwise you wouldn’t have built it this way. The issue though is that your library is making a choice that’s hidden from the user. Namely, which one of the results is “correct.” What if my lookup by domain had multiple results and I actually wanted the second one? Instead, make these get_ methods only work with a Result, not a list of Results, e.g. change the above to:

 def get_subdomains(builtwithjson_result) do
      builtwithjson_result
          |> Map.get(subdomains, "Result")
          |> Map.get("Paths")
          |> Enum.map(fn x -> Map.get(x, "SubDomain") end)
        |> Enum.reject(&(&1 == ""))
  end

Now, you do force the library user to pick which result they want, and they could get an error when using the get_ methods, but your current library has the following behavior:

# Imagine the list of results has, in order:
# 1. A result with a "Result" field, but no "Attributes" field.
# 2. A result with an "Atttribute" field.
results = Builtwith.lookup_by_domain("google.com", my_api_key)

# Reads the "SubDomain" field from the first entry in the list of results. 
subdomains = results |> Builtwith.get_subdomains() 

# Read the Attributes field from the second entry in the list of results.
attributes = results |> Builtwith.get_attributes() 

The user now has a list of subdomains and a list of attributes, but they aren’t from the same result. This could be very bad for some APIs. This exact scenario may be impossible with the Builtwith API, but it could be possible with another API with a different data model and could have very bad consequences if you get this mixed up.

Micro optimization: Avoid double Enum calls

This is a small one and someone may correct me if I’m incorrect about this. In get_subdomains:

|> Enum.map(fn x -> Map.get(x, "SubDomain") end)
|> Enum.reject(&(&1 == ""))

Each call to Enum will basically allocate a new list (which will increase memory usage). Instead you can use the Stream API:

|> Stream.map(fn x -> Map.get(x, "SubDomain") end)
|> Enum.reject(&(&1 == ""))

This will lead to a slight optimization to the memory footprint of your code. Note, Streams are lazy - the output of a Stream method is always a Stream, so you will always need to end with an Enum method to get the type you actually want at the end.

kokolegorille

kokolegorille

BTW Req is inspired by requests, a Python HTTP client…

Where Next? Top

Trending in Questions Top

katta
I having some trouble figuring out if I have set myself too strict of standards for my production server. Currently I can handle 75% of r...
New
brecabral
Documentation While reading the Scoped Routes section, I noticed that the documentation currently refers to a problem without explainin...
New
achenet
Hello, I’m trying to build a basic Phoenix web-app, and I’d like to use Tailwind. However, when I launch mix phx.server, I get an error...
New
kpanic
Hi everyone, I am toying with the idea of building a “match maker” for giving personal help to people that wants to start coding. I sta...
New
asweet-confluent
I recently noticed that Elixir’s Logger defaults its primary log level to :debug when no :logger, :level application configuration is pre...
New
Cxx-mlr
I’m working on a small exercise involving update_in/3, and I came up with this solution: data = %{ name: "Periodic Table", category:...
New
ChrisAmelia
I’ve got trouble wrapping my head around the order in which functions are called in this snippet (from Phoenix’s authentication): toke...
New

Other Trending Topics Top

GenericJam
Edit: 2026 May 15 - This post is archived. Mob is alive!! Main docs: mob v0.7.11 — Documentation A bit of explanation for the slightly c...
New
JesseHerrick
Hey, I’m Jesse and I’m the main contributor behind Dexter, a full-featured, lightning-fast Elixir LSP optimized for large codebases. It s...
New
mudasobwa
I am happy to introduce the very α version of the new programming language compiled to BEAM. Welcome Cure. It has literally three kille...
New
garrison
Hobbes is a low-level distributed database for the Elixir programming language. Hobbes provides a simple, safe, and scalable storage lay...
New
mhanberg
Hi everyone! The first release candidate for the Expert language server project is now available! We’ve published a press release detai...
New
budgie
A little off-topic, but I feel like people here have a good head on their shoulders. I used to be quite good at making software. Was luc...
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement

Options

Thread Display Mode




Thread Preview

Skip Thread Previews