←back to thread

Redbox left PII on decommissioned machines

(digipres.club)
294 points NotPractical | 1 comments | 16 Oct 24 00:15 UTC | HN request time: 0.256s | source
Show context
xnorswap ◴[16 Oct 24 08:14 UTC] No.41856752[source]▶
> Redbox.HAL.Configuration

> .ConfigurationFileService implements IConfigurationFileService

> STOP MAKING SERVICES AND FACTORIES AND INTERFACES AND JUST READ THE FUCKING

> JSON FILE YOU ENTERPRISE FUCKERS

I know it's cool to "hate" on OO, but "just read the fucking file" doesn't work if you want to run your unit tests without reading a fucking file.

It makes sense to abstract configuration behind an interface so you can easily mock it our or implement it differently for unit testing.

Perhaps you also want to have some services configured through a database instead.

This isn't a ConfigurationFileServiceFactoryFactory.

replies(12): >>41856822 #>>41856831 #>>41856836 #>>41856965 #>>41857895 #>>41858054 #>>41859117 #>>41859509 #>>41859750 #>>41859882 #>>41860221 #>>41864182 #
1. FrustratedMonky ◴[16 Oct 24 13:59 UTC] No.41859117[source]▶
The thing that should be tested is whatever you are handing to a client app to use. If it is an interface, then test the interface, not the file behind it. If the client will get the file, then test that the file is correct.

So in this case, is this entire file being handed to clients to do what they will with it? Does that make sense as an interface.

If you are building an app, and you want other parts of the app, or clients of the app, to use this data, does it make sense to just hand over the entire file as the interface.

Basically :

Programmer 1: "Hey man, show me your data interface so I can build a quick lookup on something"

Programmer 2: "here is the whole damn file, do whatever you want and leave me alone. Figure it out yourself, and no I'm not going to give you a schema and I'll change it whenever I want".