Vogen 1.0.1

Vogen

<p align="center"> <img src="./assets/cavey.png"> </p>

What is the package?

This is a semi-opinionated library which generates Value Objects that wrap simple primitives such as int, string, double etc. The main goal of this project is to have almost the same speed and memory performance as using primitives.

Primitive Obsession means being obsessed with primitives. It is a Code Smell that degrades the quality of software.

"Primitive Obsession is using primitive data types to represent domain ideas" #

Some examples:

• instead of int age - we'd have Age age. Age might have validation that it couldn't be negative
• instead of string postcode - we'd have Postcode postcode. Postcode might have validation on the format of the text

The opinions are expressed as:

• A Value Object (VO) is constructed via a factory method named From, e.g. Age.From(12)
• A VO is equatable (Age.From(12) == Age.From(12))
• A VO, if validated, is validated with a private static method named Validate that returns a Validation result
• Any validation that is not Validation.Ok results in a ValueObjectValidationException being thrown

Instead of

int customerId = 42;

... we'd have

var customerId = CustomerId.From(42);

CustomerId is declared as:

[ValueObject(typeof(int))]
public partial struct CustomerId 
{
}

That's all you need to do to switch from a primitive to a Value Object.

Here it is again with some validation

[ValueObject(typeof(int))]
public partial struct CustomerId 
{
    private static Validation Validate(int value) => 
        value > 0 ? Validation.Ok : Validation.Invalid(); 
}

This allows us to have more strongly typed domain objects instead of primitives, which makes the code easier to read and enforces better method signatures, so instead of:

public void DoSomething(int customerId, int supplierId, int amount)

we can have:

public void DoSomething(CustomerId customerId, SupplierId supplierId, Amount amount)

Now, callers can't mess up the ordering of parameters and accidentally pass us a Supplier ID in place of a Customer ID.

It also means that validation is in just one place. You can't introduce bad objects into your domain, therefore you can assume that in your domain every ValueObject is valid. Handy.

How does it compare to using native types?

Here's the benchmarks comparing a native int to a ValueObject:

|                  Method |     Mean |    Error |   StdDev | Ratio |  Gen 0 | Gen 1 | Gen 2 | Allocated |
|------------------------ |---------:|---------:|---------:|------:|-------:|------:|------:|----------:|
|        UsingIntNatively | 17.04 ns | 0.253 ns | 0.014 ns |  1.00 |      - |     - |     - |         - |
|  UsingValueObjectStruct | 19.76 ns | 2.463 ns | 0.135 ns |  1.16 |      - |     - |     - |         - |


There's hardly any speed overhead, and no memory overhead.

The next most common scenario is using a VO class to represent a native `String`.  These results are:

```ini
|                   Method |     Mean |    Error |  StdDev | Ratio |  Gen 0 | Gen 1 | Gen 2 | Allocated |
|------------------------- |---------:|---------:|--------:|------:|-------:|------:|------:|----------:|
|      UsingStringNatively | 204.4 ns |  8.09 ns | 0.44 ns |  1.00 | 0.0153 |     - |     - |     256 B |
|  UsingValueObjectAsClass | 250.7 ns | 29.97 ns | 1.64 ns |  1.23 | 0.0196 |     - |     - |     328 B |
| UsingValueObjectAsStruct | 248.9 ns | 18.82 ns | 1.03 ns |  1.22 | 0.0181 |     - |     - |     304 B |