Proposal for clearer rule definition syntax with canBeUsedBy

[pfazzi]

Feature Request

Q	A
New Feature	yes
RFC	yes
BC Break	no

Summary

I have a recurring use case in our codebase where we want to prevent all modules from depending on a specific namespace, except a couple of well-known exceptions.

Today, this is expressed like this:

// No other module should depend on this one.
// We only allow two known exceptions: Logging and RequestHandler.
Rule::allClasses()
    ->except(
        'Acme\Quoting\Requests*',
        'Acme\Domain\Logging',
        'Acme\Service\RequestHandler',
    )
    ->that(new ResideInOneOfTheseNamespaces('Acme'))
    ->should(new NotDependsOnTheseNamespaces('Acme\Quoting\Requests'))
    ->because('no other module except Logging and RequestHandler should depend on the Requests module');

I think this rule is harder to read and easy to get wrong, especially as the number of exceptions grows.

I’d like to propose a second, more declarative syntax to make this kind of intent more readable:

Rule::namespace('Acme\Quoting\Requests')
    ->canBeUsedBy(
        'Acme\Domain\Logging',
        'Acme\Service\RequestHandler'
    );

Thanks!

[fain182]

I see that the declarative syntax is more readable, but I think it would be difficult to explain when to use Rule::allClasses()->that(new ResideInOneOfTheseNamespaces('Acme')) and when to use Rule::namespace('Acme')...

Maybe we can improve the situation making something like:

Rule::allClasses()
    ->that(new ResideInOneOfTheseNamespaces('Acme\Quoting\Requests'))
    ->should(new BeUsedOnlyBy(['Acme\Domain\Logging', 'Acme\Service\RequestHandler']));

Or some other ways to fit this new concept in our existing structure..
(I think the implementation of this could be tricky, maybe someone else has better ideas.)

[fain182]

Now that I've read #492, I wonder if Rule::namespace('Acme') might just be a shortcut for Rule::allClasses()->that(new ResideInOneOfTheseNamespaces('Acme'))...

[pfazzi]

You’re right, but my goal here is to offer a simpler and more expressive DSL to cover the most common architectural rules we encounter in real-world projects.

For example, with this kind of DSL:

Rule::namespace('Acme\Quoting\RequestsForQuote')
    ->shouldNotDependOnOtherNamespaces()
    ->except('Acme\Entity\Quote', 'Psr', 'Symfony', 'RdKafka', 'Assert', 'Redis');

Rule::namespace('Acme\Quoting\RequestsForQuote')
    ->canOnlyBeUsedBy(
        'Acme\Domain\Logging',
        'Acme\Service\RequestHandler',
    );

…I can express most of the rules in our codebase in a very concise and readable way. The intention becomes crystal clear, and the developer experience improves a lot from my POV, especially for engineers who don’t want to dive into the Arkitect APIs every time.

I’d love to evolve this DSL further if there’s interest.

[AlessandroMinoccheri]

in my opinion we sould try to foloow this idea, it can add more flexibility and options for developers at the end.

[pfazzi]

I think we can probably keep the current DSL and build on top of it a more high-level DSL that covers the most relevant cases.

[pfazzi]

An even simpler version of the DSL:

Rule::namespace('Acme\Compliance')
    ->canDependOnlyOn('Acme\Common', 'Acme\Clock');

Rule::namespace('Acme\Compliance')
    ->shouldNotBeUsedByAnyOtherModule();

Rule::namespace('Acme\Pricing')
    ->canOnlyBeUsedBy('Acme\Logging', 'Acme\Service\RequestHandler');