Skip to main content

Ruby: My Take on Pivotal Labs, Part I

Pivotal Labs is one of my favorite companies. I have a tremendous amount of respect for how they develop software. They put the "extreme" in extreme programming, and more importantly, they get stuff done. However, there are some things that Pivotal Labs tend to do that I disagree with.

I have such high regard for Pivotal Labs that I specifically try to find startups that started at Pivotal Labs when I'm looking for a job. Since these companies often make you do a three hour pair programming session on their code, I've seen the code of multiple companies that started at Pivotal Labs. Hence, although I don't know if Pivotal Labs has an official opinion on these topics, I've seen these things at enough companies that I feel it's worth commenting on.

First of all, many of the companies that I interviewed at didn't use database-level foreign key constraints and database constraints in general. I know that it's trendy in the Rails world to try to enforce your constraints at the application level. (I'll admit that in some cases involving sharding, you can't use foreign key constraints. However, very few Rails applications are built with sharding.) Unfortunately, the application is simply incapable of truly enforcing certain constraints such as uniqueness constraints and foreign key constraints. Only the database can apply these constraints because they interact with ACID and transactions.

Secondly, as far as I can tell, several of the companies I interviewed at are susceptible to mass assignment vulnerabilities because they don't properly lock things down with attr_accessible such that things are not accessible by default. Perhaps this problem is going away in Rails 3, I don't know. However, many of the companies I talked to didn't want me to explain to them why their code was vulnerable.

Thirdly, a lot of projects at Pivotal Labs tend to use view tests. I think that unit testing views is a total waste of time. Apparently, so does Sarah Mei at Pivotal Labs.

Rather than unit testing the model, view, and controller separately, I prefer to rely on Cucumber and Webrat more heavily. I still write some model tests using RSpec, but I never duplicate things that are already tested by Cucumber and Webrat. I explained my approach and my reasoning in another blog post. Unfortunately, not everyone agrees with me, and this is a hot topic right now.

Last of all, I've seen several Pivotal Labs code bases that use Rails 2.3.X, but haven't switched to using the rails_xss plugin. The rails_xss plugin can really help avoid XSS vulnerabilities. It allows you to remove most of the h() calls in your templates since it escapes things by default. I think this behavior is the norm in Rails 3, so this complaint will soon go away for new code bases.

There's an old saying that if two people agree on everything, than only one of them is doing all the thinking. Hence, it should come as no surprise that I disagree with a few things that I've seen in various Pivotal Labs projects. Hopefully no one at Pivotal Labs will think worse of me for pointing those things out.


Popular posts from this blog

Ubuntu 20.04 on a 2015 15" MacBook Pro

I decided to give Ubuntu 20.04 a try on my 2015 15" MacBook Pro. I didn't actually install it; I just live booted from a USB thumb drive which was enough to try out everything I wanted. In summary, it's not perfect, and issues with my camera would prevent me from switching, but given the right hardware, I think it's a really viable option. The first thing I wanted to try was what would happen if I plugged in a non-HiDPI screen given that my laptop has a HiDPI screen. Without sub-pixel scaling, whatever scale rate I picked for one screen would apply to the other. However, once I turned on sub-pixel scaling, I was able to pick different scale rates for the internal and external displays. That looked ok. I tried plugging in and unplugging multiple times, and it didn't crash. I doubt it'd work with my Thunderbolt display at work, but it worked fine for my HDMI displays at home. I even plugged it into my TV, and it stuck to the 100% scaling I picked for the othe

ERNOS: Erlang Networked Operating System

I've been reading Dreaming in Code lately, and I really like it. If you're not a dreamer, you may safely skip the rest of this post ;) In Chapter 10, "Engineers and Artists", Alan Kay, John Backus, and Jaron Lanier really got me thinking. I've also been thinking a lot about Minix 3 , Erlang , and the original Lisp machine . The ideas are beginning to synthesize into something cohesive--more than just the sum of their parts. Now, I'm sure that many of these ideas have already been envisioned within , LLVM , Microsoft's Singularity project, or in some other place that I haven't managed to discover or fully read, but I'm going to blog them anyway. Rather than wax philosophical, let me just dump out some ideas: Start with Minix 3. It's a new microkernel, and it's meant for real use, unlike the original Minix. "This new OS is extremely small, with the part that runs in kernel mode under 4000 lines of executable code.&quo

Haskell or Erlang?

I've coded in both Erlang and Haskell. Erlang is practical, efficient, and useful. It's got a wonderful niche in the distributed world, and it has some real success stories such as CouchDB and Haskell is elegant and beautiful. It's been successful in various programming language competitions. I have some experience in both, but I'm thinking it's time to really commit to learning one of them on a professional level. They both have good books out now, and it's probably time I read one of those books cover to cover. My question is which? Back in 2000, Perl had established a real niche for systems administration, CGI, and text processing. The syntax wasn't exactly beautiful (unless you're into that sort of thing), but it was popular and mature. Python hadn't really become popular, nor did it really have a strong niche (at least as far as I could see). I went with Python because of its elegance, but since then, I've coded both p