Elixir’s macros are a powerful way to add language features without encoding them in the language core itself. One of such features is a pattern one could call “mixin” (by analogy to the Mixin concept in class based object-oriented languages.

In Ruby mixin modules are used for example to define the == , < , >= , etc operators for a class if the <=> (compare) operator is defined. The compare operator returns -1 if the first argument is smaller than the second, 0 if it is equal to the second and 1 if it is greater than the second. Obviously if you have that it’s easy to define < and friends. By including the Comparable mixin you get most of the comparison operators for free, just remember to define <=> .

Default functions for protocols

In Elixir we don’t have classes but we do have similar situations where you generally want to define something in terms of something else. Take for example Enumerable . The Enumerable protocol has three methods: reduce/3 , count/1 and member?/2 . However you can always define count and member? in terms of reduce , they’re just there so that you can override them with a more efficient implementation.

Because protocols don’t support default definitions for a method you always have to define all three, even if you don’t do anything special for count and member? . That is to say for a simple binary tree you have to write:

defrecord BinTree , value: nil , left: nil , right: nil defimpl Enumerable , for: BinTree do def reduce ( nil , acc , _ ), do : acc def reduce ( BinTree [ value: value , left: left , right: right ], acc , fun ) do acc1 = fun . ( value , acc ) acc2 = reduce ( left , acc1 , fun ) reduce ( right , acc2 , fun ) end def count ( BinTree [] = t ) do reduce ( t , 0 , fn ( _ , acc ) -> acc + 1 end ) end def member? ( BinTree [] = t , x ) do reduce ( t , false , fn ( v , acc ) -> acc or x == v end ) end end

Using a mixin we can simplify this. A mixin in Elixir is generally defined as a module with a __using__ macro.

defmodule Enumerable . Mixin do defmacro __using__ ( _ ) do quote location: keep do def count ( e ) do reduce ( e , 0 , fn ( _ , acc ) -> acc + 1 end ) end def member? ( e , x ) do reduce ( e , false , fn ( v , acc ) -> acc or x == v end ) end end end end

By simply writing use Enumerable.Mixin we now get count and member? defined in our module. The argument to __using__ we’re ignoring is a list of keywords that you can use with use , for example use ExUnit.TestCase, async: true .

With the mixin our code becomes simpler:

defimpl Enumerable , for: BinTree . Tree do use Enumerable . Mixin def reduce ( nil , acc , _ ), do : acc def reduce ( BinTree [ value: value , left: left , right: right ], acc , fun ) do acc1 = fun . ( value , acc ) acc2 = reduce ( left , acc1 , fun ) reduce ( right , acc2 , fun ) end end

Certainly an improvement. But what if we want to define one of the methods we generated. For example if our binary tree has the invariant “left.value < value < right.value” we can use that for faster member testing.

To support this we’ll mark the mixed in functions as overridable. That means that if the compiler comes across a new definition for the function (i.e. function clauses that aren’t right next to previous clauses of the function) it will not complain but forget about the old definition of the function and use the new one.

defmodule Enumerable . Mixin do defmacro __using__ ( _ ) do quote location: keep do def count ( e ) do reduce ( e , 0 , fn ( _ , acc ) -> acc + 1 end ) end def member? ( e , x ) do reduce ( e , false , fn ( v , acc ) -> acc or x == v end ) end defoverridable [ count: 1 , member?: 2 ] end end end

The arguments to defoverridable are the function names and arities of the functions you want to be overridable. Now that member? is overridable we can define a new custom member? :

defimpl Enumerable , for: BinTree . Tree do use Enumerable . Mixin def reduce ( nil , acc , _ ), do : acc def reduce ( BinTree [ value: value , left: left , right: right ], acc , fun ) do acc1 = fun . ( value , acc ) acc2 = reduce ( left , acc1 , fun ) reduce ( right , acc2 , fun ) end def member? ( nil , _ ), do : false def member? ( BinTree [ value: value , left: left , right: right ], x ) do cond do x == value -> true x < value -> member? ( left , x ) x > value -> member? ( right , x ) end end end

Now our member? is much faster, assuming a balanced tree of 1024 nodes it only takes 10 steps instead of 1024 steps.

Behaviours

Another place where mixins come in handy is in OTP style behaviours. Take a look at a (slightly edited) bit of GenServer.Behaviour:

defmodule GenServer . Behaviour defmacro __using__ ( _ ) do quote location: :keep do @behavior :gen_server def init ( args ) do { :ok , args } end def handle_call ( _request , _from , state ) do { :noreply , state } end # functions ommitted defoverridable [ init: 1 , handle_call: 3 , handle_info: 2 , handle_cast: 2 , terminate: 2 , code_change: 3 ] end end end

This declares the module that uses GenServer.Behaviour to be a gen_server callback module ( @behavior :gen_server ) and declares all the callbacks with simple no-op implementations, which are overridable. The idea is that you define just the callbacks you need without being forced to declare all of them just to keep the compiler happy.

Caveats

Mixins are a great tool. But like all tools they have their specific strengths and weaknesses. Ever tried to put a nail in a wall with a screw driver?

Mixins are macro’s and as such they tend to obscure the true meaning of the code. If you refer to a function that was introduced by a mixin people might wonder where that function came from. Luckily use is fairly easy to spot so this isn’t such a big problem.

Mixins also bloat the code by placing copies of definitions in multiple files. It’s best to keep mixed in definitions simple, if you need something more complicated consider factoring out the part of a function that doesn’t need to be in the target module into a separate function in some common module and call that.

Finally badly documented mixins make understanding what goes on in the target module much harder than it needs to be. If you write a mixin make sure you include documentation on what functions it adds and what they do.

These small quibbles aside mixins are a great tool for reducing the amount of boilerplate in modules.