HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
github
scientist
Ruby2014–2023
github / scientist

scientist

:microscope: A Ruby library for carefully refactoring critical paths.

21Distinct people
24Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
7.8KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

:microscope: A Ruby library for carefully refactoring critical paths.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 8:59:20 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year24 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2014-11-30 21:15:08 UTC to 2023-11-15 12:59:57 UTC.

02462014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 comments20142015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 1 submissions, 5 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 1 submissions, 2 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 2 submissions, 1 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 1 submissions, 2 comments2023

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC211
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC615
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC312
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC321
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC211
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC312

From the project README

An excerpt from the repository, fetched Nov 13, 2026.

Read the project’s introduction
Scientist! A Ruby library for carefully refactoring critical paths. How do I science? Let's pretend you're changing the way you handle permissions in a large web app. Tests can help guide your refactoring, but you really want to compare the current and refactored behaviors under load. require "scientist" class MyWidget def allows?(user) experiment = Scientist::Default.new "widget-permissions" experiment.use { model.check_user(user).valid? } # old way experiment.try { user.can?(:read, model) } # new way experiment.run end end Wrap a use block around the code's original behavior, and wrap try around the new behavior. experiment.run will always return whatever the use block returns, but it does a bunch of stuff behind the scenes: It decides whether or not to run the try block, Randomizes the order in which use and try blocks are run, Measures the wall time and cpu time of all behaviors in seconds, Compares the result of try to the result of use, Swallow and record exceptions raised in the try block when overriding raised, and Publishes all this information. The use block is called the control. The try block is called the candidate. Creating an experiment is wordy, but when you include the Scientist module, the science helper will instantiate an experiment and call run for you: require "scientist" class MyWidget include Scientist def allows?(user) science "widget-permissions" do |experiment| experiment.use { model.check_user(user).valid? } # old way experiment.try { user.can?(:read, model) } # new way end # returns the control value end end If you don't declare any try blocks, none of the Scientist machinery is invoked and the control value is always returned. Making science useful The examples above will run, but they're not really doing anything. The try blocks don't run yet and none of the results get published. Replace the default experiment implementation to control execution and reporting: require "scientist/experiment" class MyExperiment include Scientist::Experiment attr_accessor :name def initialize(name) @name = name end def enabled? # see "Ramping up experiments" below true end def raised(operation, error) # see "In a Scientist callback" below p "Operation '#{operation}' failed with error '#{error.inspect}'" super # will re-raise end def publish(result) # see "Publishing results" below p result end end When Scientist::Experiment is included in a class, it automatically sets it as the default implementation via Scientist::Experiment.set_default. This set_default call is skipped if you include Scientist::Experiment in a module. Now calls to the science helper will load instances of MyExperiment. Controlling comparison Scientist compares control and candidate values using ==. To override this behavior, use compare to define how to compare observed values instead: class MyWidget include Scientist def users science "users" do |e| e.use { User.all } # returns User instances e.try { UserService.list } # returns UserService::User instances e.compare do |control, candidate| control.map(&:login) == candidate.map(&:login) end end end end If either the control block or candidate block raises an error, Scientist compares the two observations' classes and messages using ==. To override this behavior, use compare_errors to define how to compare observed errors instead: class MyWidget include Scientist def slug_from_login(login) science "slug_from_login" do |e| e.use { User.slug_from_login login } # returns String instance or ArgumentError e.try { UserService.slug_from_login login } # returns String instance or ArgumentError compare_error_message_and_class = -> (control, candidate) do control.class == candidate.class && control.message == candidate.message end compare_argument_errors = -> (control, candidate) do control.class == ArgumentError && candidate.class == ArgumentError && control.message.start_with?("Input has invalid characters") && candidate.message.start_with?("Invalid characters in input") end e.compare_errors do |control, candidate| compare_error_message_and_class.call(control, candidate) || compare_argument_errors.call(control, candidate) end end end end Adding context Results aren't very useful without some way to identify them. Use the context method to add to or retrieve the context for an experiment: science "widget-permissions" do |e| e.context :user => user e.use { model.check_user(user).valid? } e.try { user.can?(:read, model) } end context takes a Symbol-keyed Hash of extra data. The data is available in Experiment#publish via the context method. If you're using the science helper a lot in a class, you can provide a default context: class MyWidget include Scientist def allows?(user) science "widget-permissions" do |e| e.context :user => user e.use { model.check_user(user).valid? } e.try { user.can?(:read, model) } end end def destroy science "widget-destruction" do |e| e.use { old_scary_destroy } e.try { new_safe_destroy } end end def default_scientist_context { :widget => self } end end The widget-permissions and widget-destruction experiments will both have a :widget key in their contexts. Expensive setup If an experiment requires expensive setup that should only occur when the experiment is going to be run, define it with the before_run method: # Code under test modifies this in-place. We want to copy it for the # candidate code, but only when needed: value_for_original_code = big_object value_for_new_code = nil science "expensive-but-worthwhile" do |e| e.before_run do value_for_new_code = big_object.deep_copy end e.use { original_code(value_for_original_code) } e.try { new_code(
Read the full README on GitHub

What Hacker News says

2 sources

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.