Print out from Ruby on rails - ruby

address = [1,2,3]
p address
new_address = address.reverse!
p new_address
p address.reverse!
Prints:
[1,2,3]
[3,2,1]
[1,2,3]
I don't understand why the last print out is 1,2,3 if it is meant to print the address in reverse, the address is 1,2,3
I expected the last line to be [3,2,1].

In ruby when you have a ! at the end of the method call that means that it changes the recipient as well.
So new_address = address.reverse! not just assigned the reverted value to new_address but also to address.
I updated your code to make it more visible:
address = [1,2,3]
p address
new_address = address.reverse! # [3,2,1]
p address # [3,2,1]
p new_address # [3,2,1]
p address.reverse! # [1,2,3]
What you wanted to use is the same method but without !
address = [1,2,3]
p address
new_address = address.reverse
p new_address
p address.reverse
More info: http://ruby-for-beginners.rubymonstas.org/objects/bangs.html

It's all about the bang (!) in ruby.
address = [1,2,3]
p address
#> [1,2,4]
address.reverse
p address
#> [1,2,3]
address.reverse!
p address
#> [3,2,1]
Bang or exclamation mark means that you are making a permanent saved change in your code.
some more examples:
#without Bang (!).
name = "Ruby Monstas"
puts name.downcase
#> ruby monstas
puts name
#> Ruby Monstas
# With Bang(!) Operator
name = "Ruby Monstas"
puts name.downcase!
#> ruby monstas
puts name
#> ruby monstas

To understand why this behavior you need to know what the ! means:
It indicates that reverse! is more dangerous thant reverse following the principle Of least surprise the developer can transmit that feeling in the syntax to the people who will use it. Here the big diference is that reverse! will change the object itself and reverse not. https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/conventions-in-ruby-and-the-principle-of-least-surprise/158706/2
So address is:
address = [1,2,3]
When you call this:
new_address = address.reverse! # Address is [3,2,1]
And last:
p address.reverse! # address is [1, 2, 3]
Here the base is to understand that ! is always modifiying the object itself.

The various bang methods (methods that have a exclamation point character at the end of the method name) modify the object in place. Here's what you essentially did in your code:
address = [1,2,3]
This first line defined your address variable as [1, 2, 3]
p address
This second line prints your address variable (which is still [1, 2, 3])
new_address = address.reverse!
This third line both defined your new_address variable AND modified your original address variable in place. At this point, both new_address and address are defined as [3, 2, 1]
p new_address
This fourth line of code simply prints your new_address variable, which of course is [3, 2, 1]
p address.reverse!
Remember how we modified the original address variable in place back on the third line? Well this fifth line of code is simply printing that previously modified variable in reverse, so [3, 2, 1] becomes [1, 2, 3] again. Not only that, but again you are modifying the original variable by using the bang version of the reverse method. If at this point you were to try and print your new_address variable again, guess what...
p new_address
#=> [1, 2, 3]
In this instance, I'm not sure why you would even want to use the reverse! method. I suspect based on your confusion that you should simply be using reverse.

Related

Reassign entire array to the same reference

I've searched extensively but sadly couldn't find a solution to this surely often-asked question.
In Perl I can reassign an entire array within a function and have my changes reflected outside the function:
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use v5.20;
use Data::Dumper;
sub foo {
my ($ref) = #_;
#$ref = (3, 4, 5);
}
my $ref = [1, 2];
foo($ref);
say Dumper $ref; # prints [3, 4, 5]
Now I'm trying to learn Ruby and have written a function where I'd like to change an array items in-place by filtering out elements matching a condition and returning the removed items:
def filterItems(items)
removed, items = items.partition { ... }
After running the function, items returns to its state before calling the function. How should I approach this please?
I'd like to change an array items in-place by filtering out elements matching a condition and returning the removed items [...] How should I approach this please?
You could replace the array content within your method:
def filter_items(items)
removed, kept = items.partition { |i| i.odd? }
items.replace(kept)
removed
end
ary = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
filter_items(ary)
#=> [1, 3, 5]
ary
#=> [2, 4]
I would search for pass by value/reference in ruby. Here is one I found first https://mixandgo.com/learn/is-ruby-pass-by-reference-or-pass-by-value.
You pass reference value of items to the function, not the reference to items. Variable items is defined out of method scope and always refers to same value, unless you reassign it in the variable scope.
Also filterItems is not ruby style, see https://rubystyle.guide/
TL;DR
To access or modify an outer variable within a block, declare the variable outside the block. To access a variable outside of a method, store it in an instance or class variable. There's a lot more to it than that, but this covers the use case in your original post.
Explanation and Examples
In Ruby, you have scope gates and closures. In particular, methods and blocks represent scope gates, but there are certainly ways (both routine and meta) for accessing variables outside of your local scope.
In a class, this is usually handled by instance variables. So, as a simple example of String#parition (because it's easier to explain than Enumerable#partition on an Array):
def filter items, separator
head, sep, tail = items.partition separator
#items = tail
end
filter "foobarbaz", "bar"
#=> "baz"
#items
#=> "baz"
Inside a class or within irb, this will modify whatever's passed and then assign it to the instance variable outside the method.
Partitioning Arrays Instead of Strings
If you really don't want to pass things as arguments, or if #items should be an Array, then you can certainly do that too. However, Arrays behave differently, so I'm not sure what you really expect Array#partition (which is inherited from Enumerable) to yield. This works, using Enumerable#slice_after:
class Filter
def initialize
#items = []
end
def filter_array items, separator
#items = [3,4,5].slice_after { |i| i == separator }.to_a.pop
end
end
f = Filter.new
f.filter_array [3, 4, 5], 4
#=> [5]
Look into the Array class for any method which mutates the object, for example all the method with a bang or methods that insert elements.
Here is an Array#push:
ary = [1,2,3,4,5]
def foo(ary)
ary.push *[6, 7]
end
foo(ary)
ary
#=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
Here is an Array#insert:
ary = [1,2,3,4,5]
def baz(ary)
ary.insert(2, 10, 20)
end
baz(ary)
ary
#=> [1, 2, 10, 20, 3, 4, 5]
Here is an example with a bang Array#reject!:
ary = [1,2,3,4,5]
def zoo(ary)
ary.reject!(&:even?)
end
zoo(ary)
ary
#=> [1, 3, 5]
Another with a bang Array#map!:
ary = [1,2,3,4,5]
def bar(ary)
ary.map! { |e| e**2 }
end
bar(ary)
ary
#=> [1, 4, 9, 16, 25]

Understanding flattening an array in Ruby

I'm a confused with what .each_with_object does to an extent.
For example:
("a".."c").each_with_object("") {|i,str| str << i} # => "abc"
Also:
(1..3).each_with_object(0) {|i,sum| sum += i} #=> 0
(since integers are immutable).
After reading the example in the Ruby documentation, I'm
confused as to what the parameter inside object() actually does.
Regarding the flattify code below: I was confused with the usage of *; and why is the else statement just element? What is element intended to do?
def flattify(array)
array.each_with_object([]) do |element, flattened|
flattened.push *(element.is_a?(Array) ? flattify(element) : element)
end
end
confused with what #each_with_object does
You may have a better time understanding #each_with_object if you look at #inject first. #each_with_object is similar to #inject. Examples from http://blog.krishnaswamy.in/blog/2012/02/04/ruby-inject-vs-each-with-object/, included below:
#using inject
[[:tom,25],[:jerry,15]].inject({}) do |result, name_and_age|
name, age = name_and_age
result[name] = age
result
end
=> {:tom=>25, :jerry=>15}
#using each_with_object
[[:tom,25],[:jerry,15]].each_with_object({}) do |name_and_age, result|
name, age = name_and_age
result[name] = age
end
=> {:tom=>25, :jerry=>15}
See this Gist for example tests: https://gist.github.com/cupakromer/3371003
In depth article: http://engineering-blog.alphasights.com/tap-inject-and-each_with_object/
UPDATE
would #inject as opposed to #each_with_object work in this flattening code?
Yes, see below. I've illustratively refactored your flattening code to use #inject. Additionally, I removed the dependency on the "splat" operator (http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.3.1/doc/syntax/calling_methods_rdoc.html#label-Array+to+Arguments+Conversion)
# Flattens nested array; uses `Enumerable#inject`
# #see http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.3.1/Enumerable.html#method-i-inject
# #param arg [Array] contains objects of any type including any amount of nested arrays.
# #raise [StandardError] if arg is not Array class
# #return [Array] flat array comprised of elements from arg.
# #example
# flattify([nil, [1, [:two, [3.0], {4=>5}], "6"]]) #=> [nil, 1, :two, 3.0, {4=>5}, "6"]
def flattify(arg)
raise "arg is not Array" unless arg.is_a?(Array)
# variable ret_var used here to illustrate method's return in verbose fasion
# supplied [] used as initial value for flattened_array
ret_var = arg.inject([]) do |flattened_array, element|
# check if element class is Array
if element.is_a?(Array)
# Array#concat because flattify returns Array
# same as: a = a + b
# same as: a += b
flattened_array.concat(
# recursively call flattify with element as arg
# element is an Array
flattify(element)
)
else
# Array#push because element is not an Array
# same as: a << b
flattened_array.push(element)
end
# used in next iteration as value for first arg above in: "|flattened_array, element|"
# OR returned on last iteration, becoming value of ret_var above
flattened_array
end
# explicit return for illustrative purposes
return ret_var
end
UPDATE 2
may [I] ask why the splat operator is used here? I am still a bit
confused on that. It seems the code is [looping] each time and pushing
it in the flattened array, whats the point of the *?
flattened.push *(element.is_a?(Array) ? flattify(element) : element)
The above block is a "ternary operation" (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_operation), which is explained here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/4252945/1076207 like so:
if_this_is_a_true_value ? then_the_result_is_this : else_it_is_this
Compare the flattify examples with each other:
# each_with_object
flattened.push *(flattify(element))
# inject
flattened_array.concat(flattify(element))
Here the * splat operator (see: https://stackoverflow.com/search?q=%5Bruby%5D+splat) is doing the same thing as Array#concat. However, the splat allows flattened.push to accept either of the two possible types the ternary operation returns: 1) an Array; or 2) whatever element is. For illustration, notice how the splat operator prevents nesting:
# each_with_object with splat
flattened = [1,2,3]
flattened.push *([4,5,6]) # => [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
flattened.push *(7) # => [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
# each_with_object without splat
flattened = [1,2,3]
flattened.push ([4,5,6]) # => [1, 2, 3, [4, 5, 6]]
flattened.push (7) # => [1, 2, 3, [4, 5, 6], 7]
Conversely, Array#concat will only accept an array. If the same ternary operation was used and returned an element, it would cause an error:
# inject
flattened_array = [1,2,3]
flattened_array.concat([4,5,6]) # => [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
flattened_array.concat(7) # => TypeError: no implicit conversion of Fixnum into Array
In summary, both versions of flattify achieve the same result. However, #each_with_object uses #push, a ternary operation and a splat operator; while #inject uses an if/else statement, #concat and #push.
UPDATE 3
When we did each with object([]), the last parameter became an
array.
Yes. It becomes an array and continues to be that same array throughout the iterations until it's passed back.
So with inject the first one becomes an array?
Yes. The first one becomes the passed in array, but only for the first iteration, then it's replaced by the result of the code block for each subsequent iteration.
how does our code know if element is defined as an int and
flattened_Array is an array?
element.is_a?(Array) # => true or false
When element is Array class this method returns true, and if not returns false. false means that it's anything but an array including int.
For more info, see: http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.3.1/Object.html#method-i-is_a-3F
The parameter you pass to object() acts as accumulator for intermediate values between iterations. On entry to each iteration it is passed as flattened argument.
* is a splat operator. It converts an array to a list of arguments being passed to the push method.
Here element will take value of each array element consequently.
All this piece of code does is just recursively flat all nested arrays inside initial array.
But Ruby has built in flatten method which does the same thing.
For example
ar = [1, 2, [3, 4, [5, 6]]]
ar.flatten
#=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
Just to compare with your flattify
flattify ar
#=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
# flattened.push *(element.is_a?(Array) ? flattify(element) : element)
# flattened is the array ...object([])
# element.is_a?(Array) ...is the element in this iteration an array?
# if true flattify(element) again... meaning recursively apply method again
# if false push element onto the object([]) aka flattened
# the () around the ternary allow the recursion to complete
# the * operator can then pass the elements "passing the array condition"
# cont'd... onto flattened.push(4, 5, 6) as list of args instead of an array
# array object with range of string elements
("a".."c").each_with_object([]) do |element, the_object|
p the_object.class # returns Array
p element.class # returns String
end
# hash object with range of fixnum elements
(1..3).each_with_object({}) do |element, the_object|
p the_object.class # returns Hash
p element.class # returns Fixnum
end

Does Rubyist call Argument Lists and Array both Array?

I'm simply curious about how the terms are used, so I have a question.
First, let me quote where the terms are used.
quote from Active Record document:
Active Record Query Interface — Ruby on Rails Guides
2 Conditions
Conditions can either be specified as a string, array, or hash.
2.2 Array Conditions
Now what if that number could vary, say as an argument from somewhere? The find
would then take the form:
Client.where("orders_count = ?", params[:orders])
I was confused
Client.where("orders_count = ?", params[:orders])
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I was confused the document. Does the document refer to ^^^ part as Array?. I think ruby Array is [ ].
I found other site call this Argument Lists.
Programming Ruby: The Pragmatic Programmer's Guide
In Ruby It does what is called?
def f(a, b)
end
f(1, 2)
^^^^^^
Array or List?
Array and List?
How do you distinguish Array and List in Ruby?
Client.where("orders_count = ?", params[:orders]) ... this is Array?
No, this is not an array. These are two arguments.
How do you distinguish Array and List in Ruby?
Argument list refers to a method's arguments, it's not a class.
You can provide an argument list when defining a method:
def foo(a, b)
p a: a, b: b
end
foo is the method name and a, b is the argument list.
When calling a method, the passed arguments may also be called argument list:
foo 1, 2 # prints {:a=>1, :b=>2}
1, 2 is the argument list.
Converting between array and argument list
You can convert an array into a argument list by using *:
foo *[1, 2] # prints {:a=>1, :b=>2}
You can also convert an argument list to an array by prefixing an argument with * in the method definition:
def bar(*args)
p args
end
This allows the method to take a variable number of arguments:
bar 1, 2 # prints [1, 2]
In Ruby an argument list can be handled as both - an array or single arguments - depending on the assignment:
a, b, c = 1, 2, 3
a #=> 1
b #=> 2
c #=> 3
But:
array = 1, 2, 3
array #=> [1, 2, 3]

How to #rewind the internal position under #each?

I'm trying to write a code where the enumeration sequence is rewinded to the beginning.
I think rewind is appropriate for this application, but I'm not sure how to implement it under an each iterator passing to a block? In the Ruby-Docs example, next is used to move the internal position by one at a time. With a block, it would move autonomously.
There's not many good examples online for this specifically. My workaround at the moment is to nest an iterator under a loop and using break under the iterator. When the iterator breaks, the loop resets the enumeration sequence.
Is there a better way—as I'm sure there is—of doing this?
Use the Enumerator#rewind method from Ruby core class libarary.
Rewinds the enumeration sequence to the beginning.If the enclosed object responds to a “rewind” method, it is called.
a = [1,2,3,4]
enum= a.each
enum # => #<Enumerator: [1, 2, 3, 4]:each>
enum.next # => 1
enum.next # => 2
enum.rewind # => #<Enumerator: [1, 2, 3, 4]:each>
enum.next # => 1

Pass arguments by reference to a block with the splat operator

It seems that the arguments are copied when using the splat operator to pass arguments to a block by reference.
I have this:
def method
a = [1,2,3]
yield(*a)
p a
end
method {|x,y,z| z = 0}
#=> this puts and returns [1, 2, 3] (didn't modified the third argument)
How can I pass these arguments by reference? It seems to work if I pass the array directly, but the splat operator would be much more practical, intuitive and maintainable here.
In Ruby when you write x = value you are creating a new local variable x whether it existed previously or not (if it existed the name is simply rebound and the original value remains untouched). So you won't be able to change a variable in-place this way.
Integers are immutable. So if you send an integer there is no way you can change its value. Note that you can change mutable objects (strings, hashes, arrays, ...):
def method
a = [1, 2, "hello"]
yield(*a)
p a
end
method { |x,y,z| z[1] = 'u' }
# [1, 2, "hullo"]
Note: I've tried to answer your question, now my opinion: updating arguments in methods or blocks leads to buggy code (you have no referential transparency anymore). Return the new value and let the caller update the variable itself if so inclined.
The problem here is the = sign. It makes the local variable z be assigned to another object.
Take this example with strings:
def method
a = ['a', 'b', 'c']
yield(*a)
p a
end
method { |x,y,z| z.upcase! } # => ["a", "b", "C"]
This clearly shows that z is the same as the third object of the array.
Another point here is your example is numeric. Fixnums have fixed ids; so, you can't change the number while maintaining the same object id. To change Fixnums, you must use = to assign a new number to the variable, instead of self-changing methods like inc! (such methods can't exist on Fixnums).
Yes... Array contains links for objects. In your code when you use yield(*a) then in block you works with variables which point to objects which were in array. Now look for code sample:
daz#daz-pc:~/projects/experiments$ irb
irb(main):001:0> a = 1
=> 1
irb(main):002:0> a.object_id
=> 3
irb(main):003:0> a = 2
=> 2
irb(main):004:0> a.object_id
=> 5
So in block you don't change old object, you just create another object and set it to the variable. But the array contain link to the old object.
Look at the debugging stuff:
def m
a = [1, 2]
p a[0].object_id
yield(*a)
p a[0].object_id
end
m { |a, b| p a.object_id; a = 0; p a.object_id }
Output:
3
3
1
3
How can I pass these arguments by reference?
You can't pass arguments by reference in Ruby. Ruby is pass-by-value. Always. No exceptions, no ifs, no buts.
It seems to work if I pass the array directly
I highly doubt that. You simply cannot pass arguments by reference in Ruby. Period.

Resources