Refactor high-complexity React components in Dify frontend. Use when `pnpm analyze-component...
npx skills add yanko-belov/code-craft --skill "law-of-demeter"
Install specific skill from multi-skill repository
# Description
Use when accessing nested object properties. Use when chaining method calls. Use when reaching through objects to get data.
# SKILL.md
name: law-of-demeter
description: Use when accessing nested object properties. Use when chaining method calls. Use when reaching through objects to get data.
Law of Demeter (Don't Talk to Strangers)
Overview
Only talk to your immediate friends, not strangers.
A method should only call methods on: itself, its parameters, objects it creates, or its direct components. Never reach through an object to access another object's internals.
When to Use
- Accessing nested properties:
obj.a.b.c - Chaining method calls:
obj.getA().getB().getC() - Reaching through objects for data
- Long dot chains in your code
The Iron Rule
NEVER chain through objects. Ask, don't reach.
No exceptions:
- Not for "it's simpler"
- Not for "it's just one chain"
- Not for "the data is there"
- Not for "fewer lines of code"
Detection: The Chain Smell
If you see multiple dots, you're violating LoD:
// β VIOLATION: Reaching through objects
function getEmployeeCity(company: Company, employeeId: string): string {
return company.employees
.find(e => e.id === employeeId)
?.address.city; // Reaching into employee, then into address
}
// More violations:
user.getProfile().getAddress().getZipCode();
order.getCustomer().getPaymentMethod().getLast4();
The Correct Pattern: Ask, Don't Reach
Let objects expose what's needed:
// β
CORRECT: Ask the object directly
class Employee {
constructor(
private name: string,
private address: Address
) {}
getCity(): string {
return this.address.city; // Employee asks its own address
}
}
class Company {
getEmployeeCities(): Map<string, string> {
return new Map(
this.employees.map(e => [e.id, e.getCity()])
);
}
getEmployeeCity(employeeId: string): string | undefined {
return this.employees.find(e => e.id === employeeId)?.getCity();
}
}
// Usage: Ask company, don't reach through it
const city = company.getEmployeeCity(employeeId);
Why Chains Are Bad
| Problem | Impact |
|---|---|
| Tight coupling | Caller knows internal structure |
| Fragile code | Structure changes break all callers |
| Hidden dependencies | Not obvious what's needed |
| Hard to test | Must mock entire chain |
| Null danger | Each . is a potential null |
Allowed Method Calls
A method m of class C should only call methods on:
this- C's own methods- Parameters - Objects passed to
m - Created objects - Objects
mcreates - Components - C's direct instance variables
- Globals - Accessible global objects (sparingly)
class OrderProcessor {
constructor(private logger: Logger) {} // Component
process(order: Order): Receipt { // Parameter
this.validate(order); // this
const receipt = new Receipt(order); // Created
this.logger.log('Processed'); // Component
return receipt;
}
// β NOT ALLOWED: order.customer.address.city
// β
ALLOWED: order.getShippingCity()
}
Pressure Resistance Protocol
1. "It's Simpler"
Pressure: "One line with dots is simpler than adding methods"
Response: Simple to write β simple to maintain. Chains create fragile code.
Action: Add methods that expose needed data.
2. "It's Just One Chain"
Pressure: "It's only two dots, not a big deal"
Response: Two dots = two objects you're coupled to. Both can change and break you.
Action: Even short chains should be eliminated.
3. "The Data Is Right There"
Pressure: "The structure has the data, why wrap it?"
Response: Structure changes. Wrapping isolates you from changes.
Action: Ask the owner for the data.
4. "It's Read-Only"
Pressure: "I'm just reading, not modifying"
Response: Reading through chains still couples you to structure.
Action: Ask for what you need.
Red Flags - STOP and Reconsider
If you notice ANY of these, refactor:
- Multiple dots:
a.b.c.d - Chained getters:
getA().getB().getC() - Optional chains:
a?.b?.c?.d - Null checks for nested access
- Structure knowledge in calling code
- Mocking chains in tests
All of these mean: Add a method to ask directly.
Refactoring Chains
// β BEFORE: Chain
const zip = user.getProfile().getAddress().getZipCode();
// β
AFTER: Ask
// In User class:
getZipCode(): string {
return this.profile.getZipCode();
}
// In Profile class:
getZipCode(): string {
return this.address.zipCode;
}
// Usage:
const zip = user.getZipCode();
Quick Reference
| Chain (Bad) | Ask (Good) |
|---|---|
company.employees[0].address.city |
company.getEmployeeCity(id) |
order.customer.paymentMethod.last4 |
order.getPaymentLast4() |
user.profile.settings.theme |
user.getTheme() |
car.engine.fuel.level |
car.getFuelLevel() |
Common Rationalizations (All Invalid)
| Excuse | Reality |
|---|---|
| "It's simpler" | Chains are simpler to write, harder to maintain. |
| "Just one chain" | One chain = multiple couplings. |
| "Data is right there" | Expose it properly through methods. |
| "It's read-only" | Reading chains still couples you. |
| "Fewer lines" | Lines don't matter. Maintainability does. |
| "It's obvious what it does" | Obvious coupling is still coupling. |
The Bottom Line
Ask objects for what you need. Don't reach through them.
When you need data from nested objects: add a method on the owner that returns it. Never chain through multiple objects. Each dot is a dependency you're taking on.
# Supported AI Coding Agents
This skill is compatible with the SKILL.md standard and works with all major AI coding agents:
Learn more about the SKILL.md standard and how to use these skills with your preferred AI coding agent.