Refactoring code is an essential practice for any developer who wants to maintain clean, efficient, and sustainable software. As codebases grow and evolve, they often accumulate technical debt, become harder to understand, and more difficult to extend. In this comprehensive guide, we will explore the art and science of refactoring code, providing practical strategies, techniques, and best practices to transform messy, complex code into elegant, maintainable solutions.<\/p>\n
Refactoring is the process of restructuring existing code without changing its external behavior. The goal is to improve the internal structure of the code, making it cleaner, more readable, and easier to maintain. Martin Fowler, who wrote the definitive book on the subject, defines refactoring as “a disciplined technique for restructuring an existing body of code, altering its internal structure without changing its external behavior.”<\/p>\n
Think of refactoring as renovating a house: you’re not changing what the house does (it still provides shelter), but you’re improving how it does it (better insulation, updated plumbing, more efficient layout).<\/p>\n
Refactoring is not:<\/p>\n
Refactoring offers numerous benefits that impact both the technical quality of your codebase and the efficiency of your development process:<\/p>\n
Clear, well-structured code is easier to understand. Since developers spend more time reading code than writing it, improving readability significantly enhances productivity.<\/p>\n
Simpler code is easier to modify and extend. When you need to add features or fix bugs, well-refactored code makes these tasks more straightforward.<\/p>\n
Technical debt accumulates when quick, suboptimal solutions are implemented. Regular refactoring pays down this debt, preventing it from becoming overwhelming.<\/p>\n
Clean code makes bugs more visible and easier to isolate, reducing the time spent troubleshooting issues.<\/p>\n
Refactored code with proper separation of concerns is inherently more testable, enabling better test coverage and more reliable software.<\/p>\n
Well-structured code serves as documentation, making it easier for new team members to understand the system.<\/p>\n
While refactoring requires an upfront time investment, it reduces maintenance costs over time. This follows the “pay a little now or pay a lot later” principle.<\/p>\n
Knowing when to refactor is as important as knowing how. Here are key situations that typically warrant refactoring:<\/p>\n
When you find yourself duplicating similar code for the third time, it’s time to refactor to eliminate the duplication.<\/p>\n
Refactor code before adding new functionality. This makes it easier to understand how the new feature should integrate with existing code.<\/p>\n
If you struggle to understand a piece of code, refactor it once you do understand it. This ensures the next person won’t face the same challenges.<\/p>\n
Code reviews often reveal opportunities for improvement. Address these by refactoring before merging changes.<\/p>\n
If writing tests for a component is difficult, it often indicates design issues that should be addressed through refactoring.<\/p>\n
Schedule regular time for “housekeeping” refactoring to prevent technical debt from accumulating.<\/p>\n
There are also times when refactoring might not be appropriate:<\/p>\n
Successful refactoring follows several key principles that ensure the process is both safe and effective:<\/p>\n
Refactor in small steps rather than attempting large-scale changes all at once. This reduces risk and makes it easier to identify the source of any issues that arise.<\/p>\n
The external behavior of your code should remain unchanged after refactoring. Users should not notice any difference in functionality.<\/p>\n
Always ensure you have adequate tests before refactoring. Run tests after each small change to verify that behavior remains consistent.<\/p>\n
Don’t mix refactoring with adding new features. This separation makes it easier to verify that refactoring hasn’t introduced bugs.<\/p>\n
Use recognized refactoring patterns and design patterns. These time-tested approaches provide reliable solutions to common problems.<\/p>\n
When making significant refactoring changes, document why you made the change, not just what you changed. This helps future developers understand your reasoning.<\/p>\n
“Leave the code better than you found it.” Make small improvements whenever you touch a piece of code, even if you’re primarily there for another reason.<\/p>\n
“Code smells” are symptoms in code that suggest deeper problems. Recognizing these smells is the first step in knowing what to refactor:<\/p>\n
The same code structure appears in multiple places. This violates the DRY (Don’t Repeat Yourself) principle and makes maintenance more difficult.<\/p>\n
Example of duplicated code:<\/p>\n
\/\/ In user validation\nif (user.firstName.length > 0 && user.firstName.length < 50) {\n \/\/ Valid first name\n}\n\n\/\/ Later in the same file or another file\nif (user.lastName.length > 0 && user.lastName.length < 50) {\n \/\/ Valid last name\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nLong Method\/Function<\/h3>\n
Methods that do too much are hard to understand, test, and maintain. Functions should ideally do one thing and do it well.<\/p>\n
Large Class<\/h3>\n
Classes with too many fields, methods, or responsibilities violate the Single Responsibility Principle and become difficult to understand and modify.<\/p>\n
Long Parameter List<\/h3>\n
Methods with many parameters are hard to call and understand. They often indicate that the method is doing too much or that a new object should be created to encapsulate the parameters.<\/p>\n
Divergent Change<\/h3>\n
When one class is modified for multiple, unrelated reasons, it suggests the class has too many responsibilities.<\/p>\n
Shotgun Surgery<\/h3>\n
When a single change requires modifications to many different classes, it indicates poor separation of concerns.<\/p>\n
Feature Envy<\/h3>\n
A method that seems more interested in the data of another class than its own, suggesting it might belong in the other class.<\/p>\n
Primitive Obsession<\/h3>\n
Using primitive types instead of small objects for simple tasks (like currency, ranges, special strings).<\/p>\n
Switch Statements<\/h3>\n
Repeated switch statements based on type are often better handled through polymorphism.<\/p>\n
Temporary Field<\/h3>\n
Object fields that are only used in certain situations make the code confusing.<\/p>\n
Refused Bequest<\/h3>\n
A subclass that doesn’t use methods and properties inherited from its parent, indicating an improper inheritance hierarchy.<\/p>\n
Comments<\/h3>\n
While comments can be helpful, excessive comments often compensate for unclear code that should be refactored instead.<\/p>\n
Essential Refactoring Techniques<\/h2>\n
Here are some of the most useful refactoring techniques to address common code smells:<\/p>\n
Extract Method<\/h3>\n
Turn a code fragment into a method with a name that explains its purpose.<\/p>\n
Before:<\/p>\n
void printOwing() {\n printBanner();\n \n \/\/ Print details\n System.out.println(\"name: \" + name);\n System.out.println(\"amount: \" + getOutstanding());\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nAfter:<\/p>\n
void printOwing() {\n printBanner();\n printDetails();\n}\n\nvoid printDetails() {\n System.out.println(\"name: \" + name);\n System.out.println(\"amount: \" + getOutstanding());\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nExtract Class<\/h3>\n
Create a new class and move relevant fields and methods from the old class into it when a class is doing work that should be done by two classes.<\/p>\n
Inline Method<\/h3>\n
Replace a method call with the method’s body when the method body is as clear as its name.<\/p>\n
Move Method<\/h3>\n
Move a method to a class where it is more logically situated.<\/p>\n
Replace Temp with Query<\/h3>\n
Replace a temporary variable with a query method.<\/p>\n
Before:<\/p>\n
double calculateTotal() {\n double basePrice = quantity * itemPrice;\n if (basePrice > 1000) {\n return basePrice * 0.95;\n } else {\n return basePrice * 0.98;\n }\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nAfter:<\/p>\n
double calculateTotal() {\n if (basePrice() > 1000) {\n return basePrice() * 0.95;\n } else {\n return basePrice() * 0.98;\n }\n}\n\ndouble basePrice() {\n return quantity * itemPrice;\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nReplace Method with Method Object<\/h3>\n
Turn a complex method into its own class so that local variables become fields of the class.<\/p>\n
Decompose Conditional<\/h3>\n
Extract methods from complex conditional expressions to improve readability.<\/p>\n
Consolidate Conditional Expression<\/h3>\n
Combine multiple conditionals that lead to the same action.<\/p>\n
Before:<\/p>\n
double disabilityAmount() {\n if (seniority < 2) return 0;\n if (monthsDisabled > 12) return 0;\n if (isPartTime) return 0;\n \/\/ Calculate disability amount\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nAfter:<\/p>\n
double disabilityAmount() {\n if (isNotEligibleForDisability()) return 0;\n \/\/ Calculate disability amount\n}\n\nboolean isNotEligibleForDisability() {\n return seniority < 2 || monthsDisabled > 12 || isPartTime;\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nRemove Flag Parameter<\/h3>\n
Replace a parameter that determines behavior with multiple methods.<\/p>\n
Replace Conditional with Polymorphism<\/h3>\n
Move each leg of a conditional to an overriding method in a subclass, making the original method abstract.<\/p>\n
Introduce Parameter Object<\/h3>\n
Replace multiple parameters with a single object that encapsulates them.<\/p>\n
Preserve Whole Object<\/h3>\n
Pass a whole object instead of extracting values from it.<\/p>\n
Replace Inheritance with Delegation<\/h3>\n
Replace inheritance with delegation when inheritance is not appropriate.<\/p>\n
Testing During Refactoring<\/h2>\n
Testing is crucial during refactoring to ensure you don’t inadvertently change behavior:<\/p>\n
Establish a Test Baseline<\/h3>\n
Before refactoring, ensure you have a comprehensive test suite that verifies the current behavior of the code you plan to refactor.<\/p>\n
Types of Tests for Refactoring<\/h3>\n\n- Unit Tests:<\/strong> Test individual components in isolation<\/li>\n
- Integration Tests:<\/strong> Verify that components work together correctly<\/li>\n
- Characterization Tests:<\/strong> Document existing behavior, especially useful for legacy code<\/li>\n
- Regression Tests:<\/strong> Ensure that previously fixed bugs don’t reappear<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Test-Driven Refactoring<\/h3>\n
For legacy code without tests, consider this approach:<\/p>\n
\n- Write characterization tests to document current behavior<\/li>\n
- Make small refactoring changes<\/li>\n
- Run tests to verify behavior hasn’t changed<\/li>\n
- Repeat<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
Continuous Testing<\/h3>\n
Run tests after each small refactoring step rather than making multiple changes before testing.<\/p>\n
Monitoring Test Coverage<\/h3>\n
Use code coverage tools to identify areas of code that lack test coverage, focusing additional testing efforts there before refactoring.<\/p>\n
Tools and IDE Features for Refactoring<\/h2>\n
Modern development environments provide powerful tools to assist with refactoring:<\/p>\n
IDE Refactoring Support<\/h3>\n
Most modern IDEs include built-in refactoring tools:<\/p>\n
\n- IntelliJ IDEA\/WebStorm\/PyCharm:<\/strong> Offers extensive refactoring capabilities for Java, JavaScript, Python, and other languages<\/li>\n
- Visual Studio\/VS Code:<\/strong> Provides refactoring tools for C#, JavaScript, TypeScript, and more<\/li>\n
- Eclipse:<\/strong> Includes various refactoring options for Java and other languages<\/li>\n
- XCode:<\/strong> Offers refactoring tools for Swift and Objective-C<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Common IDE Refactoring Features<\/h3>\n\n- Rename (variables, methods, classes)<\/li>\n
- Extract\/Inline Method<\/li>\n
- Extract Interface\/Superclass<\/li>\n
- Move Class\/Method<\/li>\n
- Change Method Signature<\/li>\n
- Encapsulate Field<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Static Analysis Tools<\/h3>\n
These tools analyze code without executing it to find potential issues:<\/p>\n
\n- SonarQube:<\/strong> Identifies code smells, bugs, and security vulnerabilities<\/li>\n
- ESLint\/TSLint:<\/strong> For JavaScript\/TypeScript code quality<\/li>\n
- Pylint:<\/strong> For Python code analysis<\/li>\n
- RuboCop:<\/strong> For Ruby code analysis<\/li>\n
- StyleCop\/FxCop:<\/strong> For C# code quality<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Metrics Tools<\/h3>\n
These tools provide quantitative measures of code quality:<\/p>\n
\n- CodeClimate:<\/strong> Analyzes code quality and complexity<\/li>\n
- Codacy:<\/strong> Automated code reviews and monitoring<\/li>\n
- Understand:<\/strong> Provides detailed code metrics and visualizations<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Version Control Integration<\/h3>\n
Version control systems help manage refactoring changes:<\/p>\n
\n- Create feature branches for significant refactoring efforts<\/li>\n
- Make small, atomic commits with clear messages<\/li>\n
- Use pull requests for team review of refactoring changes<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Refactoring Legacy Code<\/h2>\n
Legacy code presents unique challenges for refactoring, often defined as code without tests or with outdated design:<\/p>\n
The Legacy Code Dilemma<\/h3>\n
To refactor safely, you need tests. To add tests, you often need to refactor first. This circular dependency requires special strategies.<\/p>\n
Creating a Safety Net<\/h3>\n
Before refactoring legacy code:<\/p>\n
\n- Write characterization tests that document current behavior<\/li>\n
- Use approval testing to capture current outputs<\/li>\n
- Implement logging or monitoring to detect runtime changes<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
Breaking Dependencies<\/h3>\n
Legacy code often has tightly coupled components that make testing difficult:<\/p>\n
\n- Use seams (places where behavior can be changed without editing)<\/li>\n
- Apply the “Sprout Method” technique (add new methods for new functionality)<\/li>\n
- Implement the “Wrap Method” approach (wrap existing methods to modify behavior)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
The Strangler Fig Pattern<\/h3>\n
For large legacy systems, consider the Strangler Fig approach:<\/p>\n
\n- Create a new system alongside the legacy system<\/li>\n
- Gradually redirect functionality from old to new<\/li>\n
- Eventually replace the legacy system entirely<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
Working with Unfamiliar Code<\/h3>\n
When refactoring code you didn’t write:<\/p>\n
\n- Start by reading and understanding before changing<\/li>\n
- Use visualization tools to map dependencies<\/li>\n
- Consult with original authors if possible<\/li>\n
- Make smaller, more cautious changes<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Refactoring in Team Environments<\/h2>\n
Refactoring in a team context requires coordination and communication:<\/p>\n
Building Team Consensus<\/h3>\n
Ensure the team agrees on:<\/p>\n
\n- When refactoring is appropriate<\/li>\n
- How to balance refactoring with feature development<\/li>\n
- Standards and patterns to follow<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Communicating Refactoring Plans<\/h3>\n
For significant refactoring efforts:<\/p>\n
\n- Document the current issues and proposed solutions<\/li>\n
- Explain the expected benefits and potential risks<\/li>\n
- Set clear scope boundaries<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Managing Conflicts with Feature Development<\/h3>\n
Strategies to minimize conflicts:<\/p>\n
\n- Use feature flags to separate refactoring from feature releases<\/li>\n
- Coordinate refactoring with the team’s release schedule<\/li>\n
- Break large refactorings into smaller, manageable pieces<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Code Reviews for Refactoring<\/h3>\n
When reviewing refactoring changes:<\/p>\n
\n- Focus on verifying behavior preservation<\/li>\n
- Check that the refactoring addresses the identified code smells<\/li>\n
- Ensure tests adequately cover the refactored code<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Refactoring and Technical Debt Management<\/h3>\n
Strategies for ongoing management:<\/p>\n
\n- Maintain a technical debt backlog<\/li>\n
- Allocate regular time for debt reduction<\/li>\n
- Implement the “Boy Scout Rule” across the team<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Measuring Refactoring Success<\/h2>\n
How do you know if your refactoring efforts are worthwhile?<\/p>\n
Quantitative Metrics<\/h3>\n
Measurable indicators of improvement:<\/p>\n
\n- Cyclomatic Complexity:<\/strong> Measures code complexity based on control flow<\/li>\n
- Coupling Metrics:<\/strong> Assess dependencies between components<\/li>\n
- Test Coverage:<\/strong> Percentage of code covered by tests<\/li>\n
- Maintainability Index:<\/strong> Composite metric of maintainability<\/li>\n
- Code Churn:<\/strong> Frequency of changes to specific areas<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Qualitative Indicators<\/h3>\n
Subjective signs of improvement:<\/p>\n
\n- Reduced time to implement new features<\/li>\n
- Faster onboarding of new team members<\/li>\n
- Fewer defects in refactored areas<\/li>\n
- Increased developer confidence and satisfaction<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Before and After Comparisons<\/h3>\n
Document the state of the code before and after refactoring:<\/p>\n
\n- Take screenshots of code metrics<\/li>\n
- Record time required for common development tasks<\/li>\n
- Note areas of frequent bugs or issues<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Long-term Monitoring<\/h3>\n
Track the impact of refactoring over time:<\/p>\n
\n- Monitor bug rates in refactored components<\/li>\n
- Assess velocity for feature development<\/li>\n
- Track maintenance costs<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Real World Refactoring Examples<\/h2>\n
Let’s examine some practical refactoring examples to illustrate the techniques discussed:<\/p>\n
Example 1: Simplifying Conditional Logic<\/h3>\n
Before refactoring:<\/p>\n
function calculateInsurance(age, vehicleYear, accidentHistory) {\n let premium = 500;\n \n if (age < 25) {\n premium += 100;\n }\n \n if (vehicleYear < 2015) {\n premium += 50;\n }\n \n if (accidentHistory > 0) {\n if (accidentHistory === 1) {\n premium += 100;\n } else if (accidentHistory === 2) {\n premium += 250;\n } else if (accidentHistory >= 3) {\n premium += 400;\n }\n }\n \n return premium;\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nAfter refactoring:<\/p>\n
function calculateInsurance(age, vehicleYear, accidentHistory) {\n return basePremium() + \n ageAdjustment(age) + \n vehicleAdjustment(vehicleYear) + \n accidentAdjustment(accidentHistory);\n}\n\nfunction basePremium() {\n return 500;\n}\n\nfunction ageAdjustment(age) {\n return age < 25 ? 100 : 0;\n}\n\nfunction vehicleAdjustment(vehicleYear) {\n return vehicleYear < 2015 ? 50 : 0;\n}\n\nfunction accidentAdjustment(accidentHistory) {\n if (accidentHistory === 0) return 0;\n if (accidentHistory === 1) return 100;\n if (accidentHistory === 2) return 250;\n return 400; \/\/ 3 or more accidents\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nExample 2: Replacing Switch Statements with Polymorphism<\/h3>\n
Before refactoring:<\/p>\n
class Employee {\n constructor(type, name, monthlySalary, commissionRate, bonusAmount) {\n this.type = type;\n this.name = name;\n this.monthlySalary = monthlySalary;\n this.commissionRate = commissionRate;\n this.bonusAmount = bonusAmount;\n }\n \n calculatePay() {\n switch(this.type) {\n case 'regular':\n return this.monthlySalary;\n case 'commissioned':\n return this.monthlySalary + (this.monthlySalary * this.commissionRate);\n case 'executive':\n return this.monthlySalary + this.bonusAmount;\n default:\n throw new Error(`Invalid employee type: ${this.type}`);\n }\n }\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nAfter refactoring:<\/p>\n
class Employee {\n constructor(name) {\n this.name = name;\n }\n \n calculatePay() {\n throw new Error('This method must be implemented by subclasses');\n }\n}\n\nclass RegularEmployee extends Employee {\n constructor(name, monthlySalary) {\n super(name);\n this.monthlySalary = monthlySalary;\n }\n \n calculatePay() {\n return this.monthlySalary;\n }\n}\n\nclass CommissionedEmployee extends Employee {\n constructor(name, monthlySalary, commissionRate) {\n super(name);\n this.monthlySalary = monthlySalary;\n this.commissionRate = commissionRate;\n }\n \n calculatePay() {\n return this.monthlySalary + (this.monthlySalary * this.commissionRate);\n }\n}\n\nclass ExecutiveEmployee extends Employee {\n constructor(name, monthlySalary, bonusAmount) {\n super(name);\n this.monthlySalary = monthlySalary;\n this.bonusAmount = bonusAmount;\n }\n \n calculatePay() {\n return this.monthlySalary + this.bonusAmount;\n }\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nExample 3: Extracting a Class<\/h3>\n
Before refactoring:<\/p>\n
class Order {\n constructor(customer, items) {\n this.customer = customer;\n this.items = items;\n this.shippingAddress = customer.address;\n this.shippingMethod = 'Standard';\n this.trackingNumber = null;\n this.shippingCost = 0;\n this.estimatedDeliveryDate = null;\n }\n \n calculateShippingCost() {\n \/\/ Calculate shipping cost based on address and method\n }\n \n setShippingMethod(method) {\n this.shippingMethod = method;\n this.calculateShippingCost();\n }\n \n assignTrackingNumber(number) {\n this.trackingNumber = number;\n }\n \n estimateDelivery() {\n \/\/ Calculate estimated delivery date\n }\n \n \/\/ Other order-related methods\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nAfter refactoring:<\/p>\n
class Order {\n constructor(customer, items) {\n this.customer = customer;\n this.items = items;\n this.shipping = new Shipping(customer.address);\n }\n \n \/\/ Order-related methods\n}\n\nclass Shipping {\n constructor(address) {\n this.address = address;\n this.method = 'Standard';\n this.trackingNumber = null;\n this.cost = 0;\n this.estimatedDeliveryDate = null;\n }\n \n calculateCost() {\n \/\/ Calculate shipping cost based on address and method\n }\n \n setMethod(method) {\n this.method = method;\n this.calculateCost();\n }\n \n assignTrackingNumber(number) {\n this.trackingNumber = number;\n }\n \n estimateDelivery() {\n \/\/ Calculate estimated delivery date\n }\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\nConclusion<\/h2>\n
Refactoring is both an art and a science. It requires technical knowledge, experience, and judgment to identify when and how to improve code without disrupting its functionality. The benefits of well-executed refactoring are substantial: cleaner, more maintainable code that’s easier to understand, extend, and debug.<\/p>\n
Remember that refactoring is not a one-time event but an ongoing process. The most successful software teams integrate refactoring into their regular development workflow, continuously improving their codebase rather than letting technical debt accumulate.<\/p>\n
By following the principles and techniques outlined in this guide, you’ll be well-equipped to transform complex, difficult-to-maintain code into clean, elegant solutions that stand the test of time. The time invested in refactoring pays dividends in reduced maintenance costs, faster feature development, and a more enjoyable development experience.<\/p>\n
As Martin Fowler wisely noted, “Any fool can write code that a computer can understand. Good programmers write code that humans can understand.” Through thoughtful refactoring, you’ll create code that not only works correctly but is also a pleasure for humans to read, understand, and modify.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Refactoring code is an essential practice for any developer who wants to maintain clean, efficient, and sustainable software. As codebases…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":7935,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7936","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-problem-solving"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7936"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7936"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7936\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7935"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7936"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7936"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/algocademy.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7936"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}