Wouldn’t it be great to add exercises for the 23 classic GoF design patterns in the Rust track? I’d be interested in contributing of course. The related GitHub issue is #2062.
I would be opposed to following that list precisely. Though the authors claim otherwise, many of these patterns are very language-specific.
In Rust, some of these are impossible, some don’t make sense, some are actively harmful and some are of course good and useful. At the same time, Rust has some of its own language-specific patterns that are no less important than any of the ones on that list.
I’d be happy to consider exercises focused around specific patterns on a case-by-case basis.
For example, there is space-age, which shows a great way to use traits and zero-sized types. I’ve been scolded for calling this the strategy pattern. Whatever people want to call them, teaching such patterns is useful and we shouldn’t be too fixated on a specific list of them.
1 Like
Thanks a lot for the hint. According to GitHub - lpxxn/rust-design-pattern: rust design patterns and GitHub - fadeevab/design-patterns-rust: Rust examples for all 23 classic GoF design patterns, and even a little more e.g. it seems like it’s possible to implement all patterns in Rust (from a technological point of view at least). Which ones of those pattern implementations are not implemented “the Rust way”? How can I achieve the same result using a “Rust way” pattern (implementation)?
Yeah, impossible was an overstatement :) That repo is very interesting. I think its readme answers your question well.
It points out the prototype pattern as very easy to implement in Rust. So easy in fact that I find it a stretch to call it a pattern. It’s just a basic language feature like variable assignment or functions. So I’d put that in the category of “doesn’t make sense in Rust”. I wouldn’t support adding an exercise about this. (Unless as part of a syllabus, where it would be taught as a language feature rather than as a pattern.)
The mediator pattern is pretty cursed if implemented correctly. That goes in the category of “actively harmful”. I’m not saying there is never-ever a use for it, but I definitely wouldn’t want to teach that on exercism.
The flyweight implementation looks pretty neat. I haven’t seen this used in the wild, but it definitely seems useful under the right conditions. Wouldn’t mind an exercise about that!
1 Like
Thanks for the hints! If you provide some checklist with patterns which make sense we could coordinate who does what and I could start implementation.
I think you should ask about individual exercises you have in mind if someone is willing to review them. If yes, you can implement it and it will be reviewed. Like I said, I don’t want to focus on a (check)list of patterns.
And feel free to open draft PRs + ask for review early, making sure your effort is always aligned.
Make sure to read the documentation about adding exercises if you haven’t already. There is also some track-specific tooling in the Rust repo that might help you.
1 Like