Monkey Patching vs Inheritance

Developers should use monkey patching primarily in scenarios like unit testing, where they need to mock or stub dependencies to isolate code behavior without modifying production code meets developers should learn inheritance to build modular, maintainable, and scalable software by reducing code duplication and promoting a clear class hierarchy. Here's our take.

Monkey Patching

Nice Pick

Developers should use monkey patching primarily in scenarios like unit testing, where they need to mock or stub dependencies to isolate code behavior without modifying production code

Pros

• It's also useful for applying quick fixes or feature extensions in legacy systems where direct source changes are impractical, or for prototyping changes in dynamic environments
• Related to: unit-testing, mocking

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Inheritance

Developers should learn inheritance to build modular, maintainable, and scalable software by reducing code duplication and promoting a clear class hierarchy

Pros

• It is essential in scenarios like modeling real-world relationships (e
• Related to: object-oriented-programming, polymorphism

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

Use Monkey Patching if: You want it's also useful for applying quick fixes or feature extensions in legacy systems where direct source changes are impractical, or for prototyping changes in dynamic environments and can live with specific tradeoffs depend on your use case.

Use Inheritance if: You prioritize it is essential in scenarios like modeling real-world relationships (e over what Monkey Patching offers.

The Bottom Line

Monkey Patching wins

Developers should use monkey patching primarily in scenarios like unit testing, where they need to mock or stub dependencies to isolate code behavior without modifying production code