Chain of Responsibility Pattern

The chain of responsibility refers to the behavioral design patterns.


Ганна Долбієва

The Jah-pictures film company shot a documentary about the Rastaman communists from Liberia called “The Red Dawn of Marley”. The film is very long (8 hours), interesting, but before being presented worldwide it turned out that in some countries moments and phrases from films may be considered heresy and do not give a rolling license. Producers of the film decide to cut the moments containing risky phrases from the film, manually and by computer. A double check is needed to ensure that representatives of the distributor are not simply shot in some countries, in the event of an error during manual inspection and installation.
Countries are divided into four groups – countries without censorship, with moderate, medium and very strict censorship. The decision is made to use neural networks to classify the level of heresy in the viewing fragment of the film. For the project, very expensive state-of-art neurons purchased with different levels of censorship detection are purchased, the developer’s task is to break the film into fragments and transfer them to chain of neural networks, from moderate to strict, until one of them detects heresy, then the fragment is sent to manual cut. It is impossible to make a walk through all the NNs, because too much computing power is spent on their work (we still have to pay for the electricity), it should stop on the first classify.
Naive pseudocode implementation:


import StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifiers

protocol MovieCensorshipClassifier {
    func shouldBeCensored(movieChunk: MovieChunk) -> Bool
}

class CensorshipClassifier: MovieCensorshipClassifier {

    let hnnclassifier: StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier

    init(_ hnnclassifier: StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier) {
        self.hnnclassifier = hnnclassifier
    }
    
    func shouldBeCensored(_ movieChunk: MovieChunk) -> Bool {
        return hnnclassifier.shouldBeCensored(movieChunk)
    }
}

let lightCensorshipClassifier = CensorshipClassifier(StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier("light"))
let normalCensorshipClassifier = CensorshipClassifier(StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier("normal"))
let hardCensorshipClassifier = CensorshipClassifier(StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier("hard"))

let classifiers = [lightCensorshipClassifier, normalCensorshipClassifier, hardCensorshipClassifier]

let movie = Movie("Red Jah rising")
for chunk in movie.chunks {
    for classifier in classifiers {
        if classifier.shouldBeCensored(chunk) == true {
            print("Should censor movie chunk: \(chunk), reported by \(classifier)")
        }
   }
}

In general, the whole solution with an array of classifiers is not so bad, however! let’s imagine that we cannot create an array, we have the opportunity to create only one entity of the classifier, which already determines the type of censorship for a fragment of a film. Such restrictions are possible in the development of the library extending the functionality of the application (plugin).
We will use the decorator pattern – we will add the reference class to the next classifier in the classifier, we will stop the verification process at the first successful classification.
Thus, we implement the Chain of Responsibility pattern:


import StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifiers

protocol MovieCensorshipClassifier {
    func shouldBeCensored(movieChunk: MovieChunk) -> Bool
}

class CensorshipClassifier: MovieCensorshipClassifier {

    let nextClassifier: CensorshipClassifier?
    let hnnclassifier: StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier

    init(_ hnnclassifier: StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier, nextClassifier: CensorshipClassifiers?) {
            self.nextClassifier = nextClassifier
            self.hnnclassifier = hnnclassifier
    }
    
    func shouldBeCensored(_ movieChunk: MovieChunk) -> Bool {
        let result = hnnclassifier.shouldBeCensored(movieChunk)
        
        print("Should censor movie chunk: \(movieChunk), reported by \(self)")
        
        if result == true {
                return true
        }
        else {
                return nextClassifier?.shouldBeCensored(movieChunk) ?? false
        }
    }
}

let censorshipClassifier = CensorshipClassifier(StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier("light"), nextClassifier: CensorshipClassifier(StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier("normal", nextClassifier: CensorshipClassifier(StateOfArtCensorshipHLNNClassifier("hard")))))

let movie = Movie("Red Jah rising")
for chunk in movie.chunks {
    censorshipClassifier.shouldBeCensored(chunk)
}

References

https://refactoring.guru/design-patterns/chain-of-responsibility

Source Code

https://gitlab.com/demensdeum/patterns/

Decorator Pattern

Pattern Decorator refers to the structural design patterns.

The decorator is used as an alternative to inheritance to extend the functionality of classes.
There is the task of expanding the functionality of the application depending on the type of product. The customer needs three types of product – Basic, Professional, Ultimate.
Basic – counts the number of characters, Professional – features Basic + prints text in capital letters, Ultimate – Basic + Professional + prints text labeled ULTIMATE.
Implement using inheritance:


protocol Feature {
	func textOperation(text: String)
}

class BasicVersionFeature: Feature {
	func textOperation(text: String) {
		print("\(text.count)")
	}
}

class ProfessionalVersionFeature: BasicVersionFeature {
	override func textOperation(text: String) {
		super.textOperation(text: text)
		print("\(text.uppercased())")
	}
}

class UltimateVersionFeature: ProfessionalVersionFeature {
	override func textOperation(text: String) {
		super.textOperation(text: text)
		print("ULTIMATE: \(text)")
	}
}

let textToFormat = "Hello Decorator"

let basicProduct = BasicVersionFeature()
basicProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

let professionalProduct = ProfessionalVersionFeature()
professionalProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

let ultimateProduct = UltimateVersionFeature()
ultimateProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

Now there is a requirement to implement the product “Ultimate Light” – Basic + Ultimate, but without the capabilities of the Professional version. It happens the first OH! It is necessary to create a separate class for such a simple task, duplicate the code.
Continue the implementation using inheritance:


protocol Feature {
	func textOperation(text: String)
}

class BasicVersionFeature: Feature {
	func textOperation(text: String) {
		print("\(text.count)")
	}
}

class ProfessionalVersionFeature: BasicVersionFeature {
	override func textOperation(text: String) {
		super.textOperation(text: text)
		print("\(text.uppercased())")
	}
}

class UltimateVersionFeature: ProfessionalVersionFeature {
	override func textOperation(text: String) {
		super.textOperation(text: text)
		print("ULTIMATE: \(text)")
	}
}

class UltimateLightVersionFeature: BasicVersionFeature {
	override func textOperation(text: String) {
		super.textOperation(text: text)
		print("ULTIMATE: \(text)")	
	}
}

let textToFormat = "Hello Decorator"

let basicProduct = BasicVersionFeature()
basicProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

let professionalProduct = ProfessionalVersionFeature()
professionalProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

let ultimateProduct = UltimateVersionFeature()
ultimateProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

let ultimateLightProduct = UltimateLightVersionFeature()
ultimateLightProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

An example can be developed for clarity and further, but even now one can see the difficulty of supporting a system based on inheritance – hard maintenance and lack of flexibility.
A decorator is a set of protocol describing a functional, an abstract class containing a reference to a child-specific instance of a decorator class that extends the functionality.
Rewrite the example above using a pattern:


protocol Feature {
	func textOperation(text: String)
}

class FeatureDecorator: Feature {
	private var feature: Feature?
	
	init(feature: Feature? = nil) {
		self.feature = feature
	}
	
	func textOperation(text: String) {
		feature?.textOperation(text: text)
	}
}

class BasicVersionFeature: FeatureDecorator {
	override func textOperation(text: String) {
		super.textOperation(text: text)
		print("\(text.count)")
	}
}

class ProfessionalVersionFeature: FeatureDecorator {
	override func textOperation(text: String) {
		super.textOperation(text: text)
		print("\(text.uppercased())")
	}
}

class UltimateVersionFeature: FeatureDecorator {
	override func textOperation(text: String) {
		super.textOperation(text: text)
		print("ULTIMATE: \(text)")
	}
}

let textToFormat = "Hello Decorator"

let basicProduct = BasicVersionFeature(feature: UltimateVersionFeature())
basicProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

let professionalProduct = ProfessionalVersionFeature(feature: UltimateVersionFeature())
professionalProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

let ultimateProduct = BasicVersionFeature(feature: UltimateVersionFeature(feature: ProfessionalVersionFeature()))
ultimateProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

let ultimateLightProduct = BasicVersionFeature(feature: UltimateVersionFeature())
ultimateLightProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

Now we can create variations of the product of any type – just initialize the combined types at the stage of launching the application, the example below is the creation of the Ultimate + Professional version:

let ultimateProfessionalProduct = UltimateVersionFeature(feature: ProfessionalVersionFeature())
ultimateProfessionalProduct.textOperation(text: textToFormat)

References

https://refactoring.guru/design-patterns/decorator

Source Code

https://gitlab.com/demensdeum/patterns

Mediator pattern

The Mediator Pattern belongs to the behavioral design patterns.

Once you receive an order to develop a joke application – the user presses a button in the middle of the screen and a funny sound of duck quacking is heard.
After uploading to appstore, the app becomes a hit: everyone quacks through your app, Ilon Musk quacks in his instagram at the next launch of a super-high-speed tunnel on Mars, Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump in debates and wins elections in Ukraine, success!
The naive implementation of the application looks like this:


class DuckButton {
    func didPress() {
        print("quack!")
    }
}

let duckButton = DuckButton()
duckButton.didPress()

Next, you decide to add the sound of the dog’s bark, for this you need to show two buttons for selecting the sound – with a duck and a dog. Create two classes of buttons DuckButton and DogButton.
Change code:


class DuckButton {
    func didPress() {
        print("quack!")
    }
}

class DogButton {
    func didPress() {
        print("bark!")
    }
}

let duckButton = DuckButton()
duckButton.didPress()

let dogButton = DogButton()
dogButton.didPress()

After another success, we add the sound of a pig squeal, already three classes of buttons:


class DuckButton {
    func didPress() {
        print("quack!")
    }
}

class DogButton {
    func didPress() {
        print("bark!")
    }
}

class PigButton {
    func didPress() {
        print("oink!")
    }
}

let duckButton = DuckButton()
duckButton.didPress()

let dogButton = DogButton()
dogButton.didPress()

let pigButton = PigButton()
pigButton.didPress()

Users complain that sounds overlap.
Add a check so that it does not happen, along the way we introduce the classes to each other:


class DuckButton {
    var isMakingSound = false
    var dogButton: DogButton?
    var pigButton: PigButton?
    func didPress() {
        guard dogButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                pigButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        print("quack!")
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

class DogButton {
    var isMakingSound = false
    var duckButton: DuckButton?
    var pigButton: PigButton?
    func didPress() {
        guard duckButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                pigButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        print("bark!")
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

class PigButton {
    var isMakingSound = false
    var duckButton: DuckButton?
    var dogButton: DogButton?
    func didPress() {
        guard duckButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false && 
                dogButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        print("oink!")
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

let duckButton = DuckButton()
duckButton.didPress()

let dogButton = DogButton()
dogButton.didPress()

let pigButton = PigButton()
pigButton.didPress()

In the wake of the success of your application, the government decides to make a law on which to quack, bark and grunt on mobile devices only from 9:00 am and until 3:00 pm on weekdays.
Change code:


import Foundation

extension Date {
    func mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() -> Bool {
        let hour = Calendar.current.component(.hour, from: self)
        let weekend = Calendar.current.isDateInWeekend(self)
        
        let result = hour >= 9 && hour <= 14 && weekend == false
        
        return result
    }
}

class DuckButton {
    var isMakingSound = false
    var dogButton: DogButton?
    var pigButton: PigButton?
    func didPress() {
        guard dogButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                pigButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                 Date().mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() == true else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        print("quack!")
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

class DogButton {
    var isMakingSound = false
    var duckButton: DuckButton?
    var pigButton: PigButton?
    func didPress() {
        guard duckButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                pigButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                 Date().mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() == true else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        print("bark!")
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

class PigButton {
    var isMakingSound = false
    var duckButton: DuckButton?
    var dogButton: DogButton?
    func didPress() {
        guard duckButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false && 
                dogButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                 Date().mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() == true else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        print("oink!")
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

let duckButton = DuckButton()
let dogButton = DogButton()
let pigButton = PigButton()

duckButton.dogButton = dogButton
duckButton.pigButton = pigButton

dogButton.duckButton = duckButton
dogButton.pigButton = pigButton

pigButton.duckButton = duckButton
pigButton.dogButton = dogButton

duckButton.didPress()
dogButton.didPress()
pigButton.didPress()

Suddenly, the flashlight application starts to force out ours from the market, let's not let it beat us, and add a flashlight by clicking on the “Oink” button, and the rest of the buttons:


import Foundation

extension Date {
    func mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() -> Bool {
        let hour = Calendar.current.component(.hour, from: self)
        let weekend = Calendar.current.isDateInWeekend(self)
        
        let result = hour >= 9 && hour <= 14 && weekend == false
        
        return result
    }
}

class Flashlight {

    var isOn = false

    func turn(on: Bool) {
        isOn = on
    }
}

class DuckButton {
    var isMakingSound = false
    var dogButton: DogButton?
    var pigButton: PigButton?
    var flashlight: Flashlight?
    func didPress() {
        flashlight?.turn(on: true)
        guard dogButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                pigButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                 Date().mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() == true else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        print("quack!")
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

class DogButton {
    var isMakingSound = false
    var duckButton: DuckButton?
    var pigButton: PigButton?
    var flashlight: Flashlight?
    func didPress() {
        flashlight?.turn(on: true)
        guard duckButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                pigButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                 Date().mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() == true else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        print("bark!")
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

class PigButton {
    var isMakingSound = false
    var duckButton: DuckButton?
    var dogButton: DogButton?
    var flashlight: Flashlight?
    func didPress() {
        flashlight?.turn(on: true)
        guard duckButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false && 
                dogButton?.isMakingSound ?? false == false &&
                 Date().mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() == true else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        print("oink!")
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

let flashlight = Flashlight()
let duckButton = DuckButton()
let dogButton = DogButton()
let pigButton = PigButton()

duckButton.dogButton = dogButton
duckButton.pigButton = pigButton
duckButton.flashlight = flashlight

dogButton.duckButton = duckButton
dogButton.pigButton = pigButton
dogButton.flashlight = flashlight

pigButton.duckButton = duckButton
pigButton.dogButton = dogButton
pigButton.flashlight = flashlight

duckButton.didPress()
dogButton.didPress()
pigButton.didPress()

As a result, we have a huge application that contains a lot of copy-paste code, the classes inside are connected to each other by a dead bundle - there is no loose coupling, such a miracle is very difficult to maintain and change further because of the high chances of making a mistake.

Use Mediator

Add an intermediate class mediator - ApplicationController. This class will provide a weak connectivity of objects, provides for the division of class responsibility, and will eliminate duplicate code.
Rewrite:


import Foundation

class ApplicationController {

    private var isMakingSound = false
    private let flashlight = Flashlight()
    private var soundButtons: [SoundButton] = []

    func add(soundButton: SoundButton) {
        soundButtons.append(soundButton)
    }
    
    func didPress(soundButton: SoundButton) {
        flashlight.turn(on: true)
        guard Date().mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() && 
                isMakingSound == false else { return }
        isMakingSound = true
        soundButton.didPress()
        isMakingSound = false
    }
}

class SoundButton {
    let soundText: String
    
    init(soundText: String) {
        self.soundText = soundText
    }
    
    func didPress() {
        print(soundText)
    }
}

class Flashlight {
    var isOn = false

    func turn(on: Bool) {
        isOn = on
    }
}

extension Date {
    func mobileDeviceAllowedSoundTime() -> Bool {
        let hour = Calendar.current.component(.hour, from: self)
        let weekend = Calendar.current.isDateInWeekend(self)
        
        let result = hour >= 9 && hour <= 14 && weekend == false
        
        return result
    }
}

let applicationController = ApplicationController()
let pigButton = SoundButton(soundText: "oink!")
let dogButton = SoundButton(soundText: "bark!")
let duckButton = SoundButton(soundText: "quack!")

applicationController.add(soundButton: pigButton)
applicationController.add(soundButton: dogButton)
applicationController.add(soundButton: duckButton)

pigButton.didPress()
dogButton.didPress()
duckButton.didPress()

Many articles on user interface architecture with a user interface describe the MVC pattern and derivatives. The model is used to work with business logic data, a view or view shows information to the user in the interface / provides user interaction, the controller is a mediator providing interaction between the system components.

References

https://refactoring.guru/design-patterns/mediator

Source Code

https://gitlab.com/demensdeum/patterns/

Strategy pattern

The Strategy pattern allows you to select the type of algorithm that implements a common interface, right while the application is running. This pattern refers to the behavioral design patterns.

Sun Tzu

Suppose we are developing a music player with embedded codecs. The built-in codecs imply reading music formats without using external sources of the operating system (codecs), the player should be able to read tracks of different formats and play them. VLC player has such capabilities, it supports various types of video and audio formats, it runs on popular and not very operating systems.

Imagine what a naive player implementation looks like:

var player: MusicPlayer?

func play(filePath: String) {
    let extension = filePath.pathExtension

    if extension == "mp3" {
        playMp3(filePath)
    }
    else if extension == "ogg" {
        playOgg(filePath)
    }
}

func playMp3(_ filePath: String) {
    player = MpegPlayer()
    player?.playMp3(filePath)
}

func playOgg(_ filePath: String) {
    player = VorbisPlayer()
    player?.playMusic(filePath)
}

Next, we add several formats, which leads to the need to write additional methods. Plus, the player must support plug-in libraries, with new audio formats that will appear later. There is a need to switch the music playback algorithm, the Strategy pattern is used to solve this problem.

Let’s create a common protocol MusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm, write the implementation of the protocol in two classes MpegMusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm and VorbisMusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm, to play mp3 and ogg files with-but. Create a class MusicPlayer, which will contain a reference for the algorithm that needs to be switched, then by the file extension we implement codec type switching:

import Foundation

class MusicPlayer {
    var playerCodecAlgorithm: MusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm?
    
	func play(_ filePath: String) {
            playerCodecAlgorithm?.play(filePath)
	}
}

protocol MusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm {
    func play(_ filePath: String)
}

class MpegMusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm: MusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm {
	func play(_ filePath: String) {
		debugPrint("mpeg codec - play")
	}
}

class VorbisMusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm: MusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm {
	func play(_ filePath: String) {
		debugPrint("vorbis codec - play")	
	}
}

func play(fileAtPath path: String) {
	guard let url = URL(string: path) else { return }
	let fileExtension = url.pathExtension
		
	let musicPlayer = MusicPlayer()
	var playerCodecAlgorithm: MusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm? 
		
	if fileExtension == "mp3" {
                playerCodecAlgorithm = MpegMusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm()
	}
	else if fileExtension == "ogg" {
                playerCodecAlgorithm = VorbisMusicPlayerCodecAlgorithm()
	}
		
	musicPlayer.playerCodecAlgorithm = playerCodecAlgorithm
	musicPlayer.playerCodecAlgorithm?.play(path)
}

play(fileAtPath: "Djentuggah.mp3")
play(fileAtPath: "Procrastinallica.ogg")

The above example also shows the simplest example of a factory (switching the codec type from the file extension) It is important to note that the Strategy strategy does not create objects, it only describes how to create a common interface for switching the family of algorithms.

Documentation

https://refactoring.guru/en/design-patterns/strategy

Source code

https://gitlab.com/demensdeum/patterns/

Iterator pattern

In this article I will describe the Iterator pattern.
This pattern refers to the behavioral design patterns.

Print it

Suppose we need to print a list of tracks from the album “Procrastinate them all” of the group “Procrastinallica”.
The naive implementation (Swift) looks like this:

for i=0; i < tracks.count; i++ {
    print(tracks[i].title)
}

Suddenly during compilation, it is detected that the class of the tracks object does not give the number of tracks in the count call, and moreover, its elements cannot be accessed by index. Oh...

Filter it

Suppose we are writing an article for the magazine "Wacky Hammer", we need a list of tracks of the group "Djentuggah" in which bpm exceeds 140 beats per minute. An interesting feature of this group is that its records are stored in a huge collection of underground groups, not sorted by albums, or for any other grounds. Let's imagine that we work with a language without functionality:

var djentuggahFastTracks = [Track]()

for track in undergroundCollectionTracks {
    if track.band.title == "Djentuggah" && track.info.bpm == 140 {
        djentuggahFastTracks.append(track)
    }
}

Suddenly, a couple of tracks of the group are found in the collection of digitized tapes, and the editor of the magazine suggests finding tracks in this collection and writing about them. A Data Scientist friend suggests to use the Djentuggah track classification algorithm, so you don't need to listen to a collection of 200 thousand tapes manually. Try:

var djentuggahFastTracks = [Track]()

for track in undergroundCollectionTracks {
    if track.band.title == "Djentuggah" && track.info.bpm == 140 {
        djentuggahFastTracks.append(track)
    }
}

let tracksClassifier = TracksClassifier()
let bpmClassifier = BPMClassifier()

for track in cassetsTracks {
    if tracksClassifier.classify(track).band.title == "Djentuggah" && bpmClassifier.classify(track).bpm == 140 {
        djentuggahFastTracks.append(track)
    }
}

Mistakes

Now, just before sending to print, the editor reports that 140 beats per minute are out of fashion, people are more interested in 160, so the article should be rewritten by adding the necessary tracks.
Apply changes:

var djentuggahFastTracks = [Track]()

for track in undergroundCollectionTracks {
    if track.band.title == "Djentuggah" && track.info.bpm == 160 {
        djentuggahFastTracks.append(track)
    }
}

let tracksClassifier = TracksClassifier()
let bpmClassifier = BPMClassifier()

for track in cassetsTracks {
    if tracksClassifier.classify(track).band.title == "Djentuggah" && bpmClassifier.classify(track).bpm == 140 {
        djentuggahFastTracks.append(track)
    }
}

The most attentive ones noticed an error; the bpm parameter was changed only for the first pass through the list. If there were more passes through the collections, then the chance of a mistake would be higher, that is why the DRY principle should be used. The above example can be developed further, for example, by adding the condition that you need to find several groups with different bpm, by the names of vocalists, guitarists, this will increase the chance of error due to duplication of code.

Behold the Iterator!

In the literature, an iterator is described as a combination of two protocols / interfaces, the first is an iterator interface consisting of two methods - next(), hasNext(), next() returns an object from the collection, and hasNext() reports that there is an object and the list is not over. However in practice, I observed iterators with one method - next(), when the list ended, null was returned from this object. The second is a collection that should have an interface that provides an iterator - the iterator() method, there are variations with the collection interface that returns an iterator in the initial position and in end - the begin() and end() methods are used in C ++ std.
Using the iterator in the example above will remove duplicate code, eliminate the chance of mistake due to duplicate filtering conditions. It will also be easier to work with the collection of tracks on a single interface - if you change the internal structure of the collection, the interface will remain old and the external code will not be affected.
Wow!

let bandFilter = Filter(key: "band", value: "Djentuggah")
let bpmFilter = Filter(key: "bpm", value: 140)
let iterator = tracksCollection.filterableIterator(filters: [bandFilter, bpmFilter])

while let track = iterator.next() {
    print("\(track.band) - \(track.title)")
}

Changes

While the iterator is running, the collection may change, thus causing the iterator's internal counter to be invalid, and generally breaking such a thing as "next object". Many frameworks contain a check for changing the state of the collection, and in case of changes they return an error / exception. Some implementations allow you to remove objects from the collection while the iterator is running, by providing the remove() method in the iterator.

Documentation

https://refactoring.guru/en/design-patterns/iterator

Source code

https://gitlab.com/demensdeum/patterns/

Memento pattern

In this note, I will describe the “Snapshot” or “Memento” pattern.
This pattern refers to the “Behavioral” design patterns.

Suppose we are developing a graphics editor, and we need to add the ability to roll back actions at the user’s command. It is also very important that the system components do not have access to the internal state of the rollback “actions”. When implementing this pattern, the other system components have access only to the object snapshot without the ability to change its internal state, providing a clear, simple external interface. To solve this problem, use the “Snapshot” or “Memento” pattern.

Memento pattern example:

When you click a sprite appears, when you click on a undo button, the action is canceled – the sprite disappears. The example consists of three classes:

  1. Canvas that shows sprites, user interface.
  2. Screen controller, it handles input and controls screen logic.
  3. Canvas states that are saved with each change, and could be are reverted.

In terms of the Snapshot pattern, classes are:

  1. Canvas – originator, which stated are saved as “mementos”, to revert changes if needed. Originator must revert his state, from memento object if necessary.
  2. Screen controller – caretaker, this class controls all screen, and know how and when to revert changes.
  3. Canvas state – memento, which contains state, and some kind of index to track changes correctly.

An important feature of the pattern is that only the Originator should have access to the internal fields of the saved state in the snapshot. Embedded classes are used to implement encapsulation, and in C ++, the ability to specify friend classes is used. Personally, I implemented a simple version without encapsulation for Rise, and using Generic when implementing for Swift. In my version, Memento gives its inner state only to entities of the same class state:

Documentation

https://refactoring.guru/design-patterns/memento

Source code

https://gitlab.com/demensdeum/patterns/

Visitor pattern

In this article I will describe a design pattern called “Visitor”
This pattern refers to the group Behavioral patterns.

Think up a problem

Basically, this pattern is used to bypass the restriction of a single dispatch (“single dispatch”), in languages ​​with early binding.

Alice X by NFGPhoto (CC-2.0)
Create an abstract class/protocol Band, make a subclass of MurpleDeep, create a class Visitor with two methods – one to output any inheritor to the console, the second to output any MurpleDeep, the main thing is that the names (signatures) of the methods are the same, and the arguments differ only in class. Through the intermediate printout method with the Band argument, create an instance of Visitor and call the visit method for MurpleDeep.
Next code on Kotlin:

The output will be “This is Band class

WTF (World Taekwondo Federation)

Why this happens is described in buzzwords in many articles, including in Russian, I suggest you present how the compiler sees the code, maybe everything will become clear right away:

Silver bullet

To solve this problem, there are many solutions, then consider the solution using the Visitor pattern.
We add the accept method with the Visitor argument to the abstract class/protocol, call visitor.visit(this) inside the method, then add the override/implementation of the accept method to the MurpleDeep class, break DRY decisively and quietly, write visitor.visit(this).
The resulting code:

Documentation

https://refactoring.guru/en/design-patterns/visitor-double-dispatch

Source code

https://gitlab.com/demensdeum/patterns

Flyweight pattern

In this article I will describe the structural pattern “Flyweight”
This pattern refers to the group Structural Patterns.

Example of the pattern below:

Why is it needed? To save RAM memory. I agree that in times of widespread use of Java (which consumes cpu and memory just like that), this is not so important, but it’s worth it.
In the example above, only 40 objects are displayed, but if you raise their number to 120,000, the memory consumption will increase accordingly.
Let’s look at the memory consumption without using the flyweight pattern in the Chromium browser:

Without the use of the pattern, the memory consumption is ~ 300 megabytes.

Now add a pattern to the application and see the memory consumption:

With the use of the pattern, the memory consumption is ~ 200 megabytes, so we saved 100 megabytes of memory in the test application, in serious projects the difference can be much larger.

Wie funktioniert das?

In the example above, we draw 40 cats or, for clarity, 120 thousand. Each cat is loaded into memory as a png image, then in most renders it is converted into a bitmap for rendering (actually bmp), this is done for speed, since a compressed png is drawn for a very long time. Without using a pattern, we load 120 thousand pictures of cats into RAM and draw, but when using the lightweight pattern, we load one cat into memory and draw it 120 thousand times with different positions and transparency. All the magic lies in the fact that we implement the coordinates and transparency separately from the cat image, when rendering the render takes just one cat and uses an object with coordinates and transparency to correctly draw.

Show me the code

The following are examples for the Rise language.

Without a pattern:


The cat image is loaded for each object in the loop separately – catImage.

Using the pattern:

One cat picture is used by 120 thousand objects.

Real life example

It is used in GUI frameworks, for example, in Apple, in the “reuse” system of the cells of the UITableViewCell tables, which raise the entry threshold for beginners who do not know about this pattern.

Source code

https://gitlab.com/demensdeum/patterns/

Documents

https://refactoring.guru/en/design-patterns/flyweight
http://gameprogrammingpatterns.com/flyweight.html