Ruby interactors: a review

I've been playing with the Ruby community's interactor pattern and found a few issues.

Written by Rico Sta. Cruz
(@rstacruz) · 3 Dec 2021

The Ruby and Rails communities often use a gem (package) called interactor which aims to make logic encapsulated into self-contained pieces. After writing a few interactors myself, I came across a few problems that I thought I’d share.

The messy contexts problem

Interactors are often used to wrap code that will receive an input, and return an output. Here’s an example that takes some input (email, name) and returns output (user):

result = RegisterUser.call(
  email: '[email protected]',
  name: 'John'
)
result.success? # => true
result.user     # => User

Working with contexts

The way interactors handle this is by using a context object that holds both inputs and outputs. I’ve found that having one object hold both inputs and outputs gets messy very quickly.

module RegisterUser
  include Interactor

  def call
    create_user
    create_profile
    track_analytics
  end

  def create_user
    context.user = User.create(
      email: context.email,
      is_admin: context.is_admin || false
    )
  end

  def create_profile
    context.profile = Profile.create(
      user_id: context.user.id,
      name: context.name
    )
  end

  def track_analytics
    Analytics.track('NEW_USER', uid: context.user.id)
  end
end

RegisterUser.call(email: '[email protected]', name: 'John')
result.success? # => true
result.email    # => string (input)
result.is_admin # => string (input)
result.profile  # => Profile (output)
result.user     # => <User> (output)

The shared contexts problem

Interactors provide an Organizer class which allows breaking apart interactors into smaller, reusable interactors. However, doing so often means the concept of “inputs” and “outputs” are a bit blurred.

module RegisterUser
  include Interactor::Organizer
  organize(
    CreateUserRecord,
    CreateProfile,
    TrackAnalytics
  )
end

module CreateUserRecord
  include Interactor
  def call
    user = User.new(context.email, context.is_admin) # Input
    context.user = user # Output
  end
end

module CreateProfile
  include Interactor
  def call
    profile = Profile.new(context.user, context.email) # Input
    context.profile = profile # Output
  end
end

module TrackAnalytics
  include Interactor
  def call
    user = context.user # Input
    Analytics.track!(user.id)
  end
end

Making sense of it

I’ve found that the more organisers are used, the more context becomes harder to manage. One way to keep track of this is making some graph that keeps track of these things. (These tables can get quite difficult to manage very quickly.)

The reusability problem

Interactors are often touted for being useful for managing reusable pieces of logic. Here’s one example of business logic that might be useful in many places.

module ValidateEmail
  include Interactor
  def call
    email = context.email

    unless EMAIL_REGEXP.match(email)
      context.fail! error: :invalid_format
    end

    if User.where(email: email).count != 0
      context.fail! error: :email_is_already_taken
    end
  end
end

Not easily reusable

While this logic is nicely self-contained, it’s not easily reusable in an organizer that might take in a different input shape.

module SendPageToFriend
  include Interactor::Organizer
  organize(
    ValidateEmail, # <-- ! not working as intended!
    DoSendPageToFriend
  )
end

SendPageToFriend(
  params: {
    email: '[email protected]',
    message: 'Have a look!'
  }
)

The error handling problem

Nested interactors break error handling. Because Interactor Organisers enforce the use of the same context fields, it’s often better to call interactors directly from other interactors.

module NestedInteractor
  def call
    ValidateEmail.call!(email: context.params.email)

    # Question: will an error in the line above
    # prevent this next line from working?
    do_work_after_validation
  end
end

Errors are swallowed by default

Unfortunately, the code above wouldn’t work, because errors are swallowed by default even when using call!. The fix here is to intentionally rescue Interactor errors and re-raise them using context.fail!.

module NestedInteractor
  def call
    ValidateEmail.call!(email: context.params.email)

    do_work_after_validation

  rescue Interactor::Failure => e
    context.fail!(error: e.context.error)
  end
end

Suggested solutions

Here are a few ideas I had on how to work around these limitations with interactors.

Avoid organisers

Organisers impose strict restrictions on how code is supposed to be structured, and I feel that the restrictions don’t necessarily make for better code. It’s not worth the extra effort in my opinion, and nested interactors are a more reasonable alternative.

Consider validating inputs

Gems like dry.rb allows writing runtime validation for types. Static compile-time type checking is most ideal in my opinion (eg, Ruby type signatures or Sorbet), but runtime validation is the closest alternative.

Catch nested iterator errors, or avoid fail!

Many devs I talked to who uses interactors have written some code to fix the shortcomings of fail! errors being swallowed. This snippet might be good to extract into somewhere easy to reuse:

module MyInteractor
  include Interactor

  def handle_errors(&block)
    yield
  rescue Interactor::Failure => e
    context.fail!(error: e.context.error)
  end
end

# Now errors can be propagated instead of being
# silently swallowed:

handle_errors do
  MyOtherInteractor.call!
end

Document inputs and outputs

Since it’s easy to get lost in what parts of a context is input or output, I found that it helps to document what each interactor’s inputs and outputs are.

# == Inputs
# [user_id] (string) The user ID
# [use_defaults] (boolean, optional)
#
# == Outputs
# [categories] (Category[])
module CreateUseCategories
  include Interactor

  def call; ... end
end

Use plain Ruby instead of interactors

Many scenarios involving interactors can be done using plain Ruby modules. Consider if the addition of a gem like interactor is worth it over writing service objects in a different way.

Written by Rico Sta. Cruz

I am a web developer helping make the world a better place through JavaScript, Ruby, and UI design. I write articles like these often. If you'd like to stay in touch, subscribe to my list.