Dataset Viewer
Auto-converted to Parquet Duplicate
rule
stringclasses
4 values
rule_title
stringclasses
4 values
rationale
stringclasses
4 values
before
stringclasses
4 values
after
stringclasses
4 values
language
stringclasses
1 value
source_file
stringclasses
4 values
canonical_repo
stringclasses
1 value
rule-1
Branch on type with an explicit `if … is_a?`, not a clever `case`
`case … in` demands exhaustive matching and, under the Grant ORM's `Grant::Base+` inference, fails to compile (`Error: case is not exhaustive. Missing types: Grant::Base`). The dot-receiver sugar `case … when .is_a?(T)` compiles, but the leading dot is a riddle the reader must decode before reaching the branch bodies. ...
case user in Users::Regular session[:user_type] = "regular" session[:session_version] = user.session_version in Users::Admin session[:user_type] = "admin" end # or, the dot-receiver sugar form: case user when .is_a?(Users::Regular) session[:user_type] = "regular" session[:session_version] = user.session_vers...
def record_session(user : Users::Regular | Users::Admin, session : Hash(Symbol, String | Int32)) : Nil if user.is_a?(Users::Regular) session[:user_type] = "regular" session[:session_version] = user.session_version else session[:user_type] = "admin" end end
crystal
examples/01_branch_on_type.cr
https://github.com/AgentC-Consulting/aed-conventions
rule-2
Name the thing; don't make the reader decode a chain
The terse form is compact, but the reader has to hold three operations in their head at once: a nilable session lookup, a block binding, and a comparison — all inside a negated guard. Naming the intermediate turns the same logic into two plain statements: this is the state we expected; refuse unless it exists and match...
return unless session["oauth_state"]?.try { |s| constant_time_equal?(s, state) }
expected_state = session["oauth_state"]? return unless expected_state && constant_time_equal?(expected_state, state)
crystal
examples/02_name_the_thing.cr
https://github.com/AgentC-Consulting/aed-conventions
rule-3
Prefer explicit guard clauses to nested ternaries / one-liners
One line, two nested ternaries, three outcomes. The author saved four lines; every future reader re-parses the precedence to find out what happens when. The guard-clause form doubles as the security argument: each line is one condition under which entry is refused, and everything after the guards assumes both checks pa...
def verify_password(password : String) : self? password_digest.empty? ? nil : (Crypto::Bcrypt::Password.new(password_digest).verify(password) ? self : nil) end
def verify_password(password : String) : self? return nil if password_digest.empty? return nil unless Crypto::Bcrypt::Password.new(password_digest).verify(password) self end
crystal
examples/03_guard_clauses.cr
https://github.com/AgentC-Consulting/aed-conventions
rule-4,rule-5
Use full, intention-revealing names; say WHY in a comment, let the code say WHAT
Cryptic names force a comment per line, and every comment just restates the code next to it. The AFTER version has FEWER comments — good names removed the need for most of them, and the one comment that remains carries information the code cannot: the specific attack (session fixation) the reset prevents.
# process the user def do_it(u) # reset the session session.reset # set the id session[:uid] = u.id # set the version tmp = u.session_version session[:sv] = tmp end
def establish_session(user : Users::Regular) : Nil # Rotate the session id BEFORE writing identity: prevents session fixation # (an attacker pre-planting a known session id that survives login). session.reset session[:user_id] = user.id session[:session_version] = user.session_version end
crystal
examples/04_reader_first_names_and_comments.cr
https://github.com/AgentC-Consulting/aed-conventions

AED Conventions — before/after examples (seed dataset, v0)

This is a seed dataset — four labeled before/after pairs, not a benchmark. It exists because the pairs are real and worth sharing now, not because four examples constitute a mature corpus. Honest framing over inflated claims: this is v0, and it is expected to grow as the AED conventions add more rules (a control-flow rule set is planned for a public v1.1).

What this is

Four {rule, rationale, before, after, language} records drawn directly from AgentC-Consulting/aed-conventions, the canonical, public repository of Agent-Enhanced Development (AED) — code conventions for codebases written, reviewed, and maintained by humans and coding agents together. Each record pairs a terser/clever form of a piece of Crystal code (before) with the AED-conforming form (after), plus the rationale a human or agent would use to justify preferring one over the other.

This is style-transfer / code-readability pair data: same behavior, two surface forms, labeled by which rule motivates the preferred form and why.

Why this shape

The conventions themselves (CONVENTIONS.md) are the source of truth — six rules, each with a stable anchor (#rule-1#rule-6) and worked examples. This dataset is a machine-readable extraction of the same before/after pairs that already live in the repo's examples/ directory as standalone, compiling Crystal files. If you want the rules in prose, read the repo. If you want the pairs as structured records, this is that.

Fields

Field Type Description
rule string Anchor id(s) in CONVENTIONS.md, e.g. "rule-1" or "rule-4,rule-5" when one example illustrates two rules together.
rule_title string Human-readable title of the rule(s).
rationale string Why the after form is preferred — the argument, not just the assertion.
before string The terser / clever / harder-to-parse form.
after string The AED-conforming form: reads like a plain statement of intent.
language string Always "crystal" in this seed; the rules generalize to other languages, the examples do not (yet).
source_file string Path in the canonical repo the pair was drawn from.
canonical_repo string Always https://github.com/AgentC-Consulting/aed-conventions — cite this when using the data.

License

Dual-licensed, matching the canonical repository:

  • Prose fields (rule_title, rationale, this card) — CC BY 4.0, credit to AgentC Consulting.
  • Code fields (before, after) — MIT, take freely, with or without credit.

Full license text: LICENSE (CC BY 4.0) and LICENSE-EXAMPLES (MIT) in the canonical repo.

Citation

Please cite the canonical repository: AgentC-Consulting/aed-conventions (CITATION.cff).

Who maintains this

AgentC Consulting — agent-enhanced development is the day job: building and modernizing production applications with coding agents doing the majority of the writing, under conventions that keep every line reviewable.

Downloads last month
11