marisradu
How can I DRY out this code more (Plug.Conn, with statement)
Disclaimer: I’m new (still learning) elixir.
Can’t figure how to DRY this code out, I would like to capture the “message” from all blocks and then send the response and halt the connection.
Original code:
def call(conn, _) do
case some_function(conn) do
{:ok, response} ->
put_private(conn, :my_app, %{my_key: response})
{:error, :error_1 ->
conn
|> put_resp_content_type("application/json")
|> send_resp(403, "Message for error 1")
|> halt
{:error, :error_2} ->
conn
|> put_resp_content_type("application/json")
|> send_resp(403, "Message for error 2")
|> halt
_ ->
conn
|> put_resp_content_type("application/json")
|> send_resp(403, "Generic message")
|> halt
end
end
I wanted to put everything in a with statement like:
with {:ok, response} <- some_function(conn) do
put_private(conn, :my_app, %{my_key: response})
else
{:error, :error_1} ->
message = "Message for error 1"
{:error, :error_2} ->
message = "Message for error 2"
_ ->
message = "Generic message"
end
I’m pretty sure there is a better way to capture the “message” and also not sure where to put the “response” as inside the “else” clause will need to put it for all clauses, outside will also be triggered if there is no error.
conn
|> put_resp_content_type("application/json")
|> send_resp(403, message)
|> halt
Any hint or constructive criticism in case you think I’m going in the wrong direction will be appreciated.
Thanks.
First Post!
LostKobrakai
Using with was already a good idea, but sometimes just using one flow control type is just not enough:
def call(conn, _) do
with {:ok, response} <- some_function(conn) do
put_private(conn, :my_app, %{my_key: response})
else
err ->
message =
case err do
{:error, :error_1} -> "Message for error 1"
{:error, :error_2} -> "Message for error 2"
_ -> "Generic message"
end
conn
|> put_resp_content_type("application/json")
|> send_resp(403, message)
|> halt
end
end
Most Liked
mbuhot
When in doubt, use more functions ![]()
def call(conn, _) do
with {:ok, response} <- some_function(conn) do
put_private(conn, :my_app, %{my_key: response})
else
err ->
message = error_message(err)
conn
|> put_resp_content_type("application/json")
|> send_resp(403, message)
|> halt
end
end
defp error_message({:error, :error_1}), do: "Message for error 1"
defp error_message({:error, :error_2}), do: "Message for error 2"
defp error_message(_), do: "Generic message"
idi527
LostKobrakai
I’m mostly of the same opinion, but with might communicate a bit more the monad-like success/error railway-ing while case is a bit more “equal cases” in it’s semantics. Especially in plugs where one branch does halt the pipeline I see myself more drawn to using with.
Last Post!
idi527
but with might communicate a bit more the monad-like success/error railway-ing
That’s a really nice way to think about it.
Trending in Questions
Other Trending Topics
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #deployment
- #library
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #channels
- #elixirconf
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #javascript
- #podcasts
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #blog-post
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #ai
- #websockets
- #elixirconf-us
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #api
- #forms
- #metaprogramming
- #security
- #hex









