
m15-anti-pattern
ПопулярноUse when reviewing code for anti-patterns. Keywords: anti-pattern, common mistake, pitfall, code smell, bad practice, code review, is this an anti-pattern, better way to do this, common mistake to avoid, why is this bad, idiomatic way, beginner mistake, fighting borrow checker, clone everywhere, unwrap in production, should I refactor, 反模式, 常见错误, 代码异味, 最佳实践, 地道写法
"Use when reviewing code for anti-patterns. Keywords: anti-pattern, common mistake, pitfall, code smell, bad practice, code review, is this an anti-pattern, better way to do this, common mistake to avoid, why is this bad, idiomatic way, beginner mistake, fighting borrow checker, clone everywhere, unwrap in production, should I refactor, 反模式, 常见错误, 代码异味, 最佳实践, 地道写法"
Anti-Patterns
Layer 2: Design Choices
Core Question
Is this pattern hiding a design problem?
When reviewing code:
- Is this solving the symptom or the cause?
- Is there a more idiomatic approach?
- Does this fight or flow with Rust?
Anti-Pattern → Better Pattern
| Anti-Pattern | Why Bad | Better |
|---|---|---|
.clone() everywhere |
Hides ownership issues | Proper references or ownership |
.unwrap() in production |
Runtime panics | ?, expect, or handling |
Rc when single owner |
Unnecessary overhead | Simple ownership |
unsafe for convenience |
UB risk | Find safe pattern |
OOP via Deref |
Misleading API | Composition, traits |
| Giant match arms | Unmaintainable | Extract to methods |
String everywhere |
Allocation waste | &str, Cow<str> |
Ignoring #[must_use] |
Lost errors | Handle or let _ = |
Thinking Prompt
When seeing suspicious code:
-
Is this symptom or cause?
- Clone to avoid borrow? → Ownership design issue
- Unwrap "because it won't fail"? → Unhandled case
-
What would idiomatic code look like?
- References instead of clones
- Iterators instead of index loops
- Pattern matching instead of flags
-
Does this fight Rust?
- Fighting borrow checker → restructure
- Excessive unsafe → find safe pattern
Trace Up ↑
To design understanding:
"Why does my code have so many clones?"
↑ Ask: Is the ownership model correct?
↑ Check: m09-domain (data flow design)
↑ Check: m01-ownership (reference patterns)
| Anti-Pattern | Trace To | Question |
|---|---|---|
| Clone everywhere | m01-ownership | Who should own this data? |
| Unwrap everywhere | m06-error-handling | What's the error strategy? |
| Rc everywhere | m09-domain | Is ownership clear? |
| Fighting lifetimes | m09-domain | Should data structure change? |
Trace Down ↓
To implementation (Layer 1):
"Replace clone with proper ownership"
↓ m01-ownership: Reference patterns
↓ m02-resource: Smart pointer if needed
"Replace unwrap with proper handling"
↓ m06-error-handling: ? operator
↓ m06-error-handling: expect with message
Top 5 Beginner Mistakes
| Rank | Mistake | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Clone to escape borrow checker | Use references |
| 2 | Unwrap in production | Propagate with ? |
| 3 | String for everything | Use &str |
| 4 | Index loops | Use iterators |
| 5 | Fighting lifetimes | Restructure to own data |
Code Smell → Refactoring
| Smell | Indicates | Refactoring |
|---|---|---|
Many .clone() |
Ownership unclear | Clarify data flow |
Many .unwrap() |
Error handling missing | Add proper handling |
Many pub fields |
Encapsulation broken | Private + accessors |
| Deep nesting | Complex logic | Extract methods |
| Long functions | Multiple responsibilities | Split |
| Giant enums | Missing abstraction | Trait + types |
Common Error Patterns
| Error | Anti-Pattern Cause | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| E0382 use after move | Cloning vs ownership | Proper references |
| Panic in production | Unwrap everywhere | ?, matching |
| Slow performance | String for all text | &str, Cow |
| Borrow checker fights | Wrong structure | Restructure |
| Memory bloat | Rc/Arc everywhere | Simple ownership |
Deprecated → Better
| Deprecated | Better |
|---|---|
| Index-based loops | .iter(), .enumerate() |
collect::<Vec<_>>() then iterate |
Chain iterators |
| Manual unsafe cell | Cell, RefCell |
mem::transmute for casts |
as or TryFrom |
| Custom linked list | Vec, VecDeque |
lazy_static! |
std::sync::OnceLock |
Quick Review Checklist
- [ ] No
.clone()without justification - [ ] No
.unwrap()in library code - [ ] No
pubfields with invariants - [ ] No index loops when iterator works
- [ ] No
Stringwhere&strsuffices - [ ] No ignored
#[must_use]warnings - [ ] No
unsafewithout SAFETY comment - [ ] No giant functions (>50 lines)
Related Skills
| When | See |
|---|---|
| Ownership patterns | m01-ownership |
| Error handling | m06-error-handling |
| Mental models | m14-mental-model |
| Performance | m10-performance |
You Might Also Like
Related Skills

fix
Use when you have lint errors, formatting issues, or before committing code to ensure it passes CI.
facebook
frontend-testing
Generate Vitest + React Testing Library tests for Dify frontend components, hooks, and utilities. Triggers on testing, spec files, coverage, Vitest, RTL, unit tests, integration tests, or write/review test requests.
langgenius
frontend-code-review
Trigger when the user requests a review of frontend files (e.g., `.tsx`, `.ts`, `.js`). Support both pending-change reviews and focused file reviews while applying the checklist rules.
langgenius
code-reviewer
Use this skill to review code. It supports both local changes (staged or working tree) and remote Pull Requests (by ID or URL). It focuses on correctness, maintainability, and adherence to project standards.
google-gemini
session-logs
Search and analyze your own session logs (older/parent conversations) using jq.
moltbot
