I need to create a class where if the attribute value is the same it does not generate a new object id, example:
result:
described_class.new('01201201202')
<PixKey:0x00007eff5eab1ff8 #key="01201201202">
if i run it again with the same value it should keep the same object id
0x00007eff5eab1ff8
is similar behavior with the symbol
test:
describe '#==' do
let(:cpf) { described_class.new('01201201202') }
it 'verifies the key equality' do
expect(cpf).to eq described_class.new('01201201202')
end
end
Running the test shows an error, because the obejct id changes:
expected: #<PixKey:0x00007eff5eab1ff8 #key="01201201202">
got: #<PixKey:0x00007eff5eab2070 #key="01201201202">
Class:
class PixKey
def init(key)
#key = key
end
end
The other answers are fine, but they are a little more verbose than needed and they use class variables, which I find to be a confusing concept because of how they are shared among various classes.
class PixKey
#instances = {}
def self.new(id)
#instances[id] ||= super(id)
end
def initialize(id)
#key = id
end
end
p PixKey.new(1)
p PixKey.new(2)
p PixKey.new(2)
p PixKey.new(1)
Running the test shows an error, because the object id changes
Not quite. It shows an error because the objects are not equal. And the error message prints both objects including their id. But the object id is not what's causing the test to fail.
I need to create a class where if the attribute value is the same it does not generate a new object id
That would probably work, but you're likely approaching the problem from the wrong side. In Ruby, equality doesn't mean object identity. Two objects can be equal without being the same object, e.g.
a = 'foo'
b = 'foo'
a.object_id == b.object_id
#=> false
a == b
#=> true
There's no need to tinker with object ids to get your test passing. You just have to implement a custom == method, e.g.:
class PixKey
attr_reader :key
def initialize(key) # <- not "init"
#key = key
end
def ==(other)
self.class == other.class && self.key == other.key
end
end
The == method checks if both objects have the same class (i.e. if both are PixKey instances) and if their key's are equal.
This gives:
a = PixKey.new('01201201202')
b = PixKey.new('01201201202')
a == b
#=> true
Create a class method to create instances and have it look up a hash.
class PixKey
##instances = {}
def PixKey.create(id)
if not ##instances.has_key?(id)
##instances[id] = PixKey.new(id)
end
return ##instances[id]
end
def initialize(id)
#key = id
end
end
a = PixKey.new(123)
b = PixKey.new(123)
c = PixKey.create(123)
d = PixKey.create(123)
puts a
puts b
puts c
puts d
Output:
#<PixKey:0x000000010bc39900>
#<PixKey:0x000000010bc38078>
#<PixKey:0x000000010bc33eb0>
#<PixKey:0x000000010bc33eb0>
Notice the last two instances created with the PixKey.create(id) method return the same instance.
Note that Ruby's new method is just a method on Class and can be overridden like any other. The docs describe the default implementation.
Calls allocate to create a new object of class's class, then invokes that object's initialize method, passing it args. This is the method that ends up getting called whenever an object is constructed using .new.
So, if you want to keep the .new syntax and still get the same objects back, we can override new on the class and call super. This is exactly what OscarRyz' answer does, just with .new and super rather than a separate helper function.
class PixKey
##instances = {}
def PixKey.new(id)
if not ##instances.has_key?(id)
##instances[id] = super(id)
end
return ##instances[id]
end
def initialize(id)
#key = id
end
end
a = PixKey.new(123)
b = PixKey.new(123)
puts a
puts b
Related
The goal is to initialize a class attribute using a class method that's overridden in sub-classes. Following is the definition of my ruby classes:
class A
class_attribute :query
self.query = self.generate_query
def self.generate_query
return "abcd"
end
end
class B < A
def self.generate_query
query_part_1 = "ab"
return query_part_1 + generate_query_part_2
end
def self.generate_query_part_2
return part_2
end
end
The reason I want to do this is because query is a constant string per class and should not be created again on instantiation but it's a complex string which is generated in multiple independent parts. Separating this logic out in methods would make the code cleaner. However, with this code, I get the undefined method generate_query for class A.
I have tried lazy initialization of the class attribute while instantiating the class like the following:
def initialize
query = self.class.get_query
end
def self.get_query
self.query = self.generate_query if self.query.nil?
end
However, this initializes the query to same value for both class A and B if A is instantiated first because self.query.nil? would then return false for B also.
The solution to your problem is simple:
You are calling self.query = self.generate_query before your generate_query method has been defined! Remember - Ruby is interpreted top to bottom and your class body is no different. You cannot call a method before it is defined.
Simply changing the code around to
class A
class_attribute :query
def self.generate_query
return "abcd"
end
self.query = self.generate_query
end
will make it work, but then you will have another problem, as the line self.query = self.generate_query will only get evaluated once in your class - B will reference the "abcd" query, not "ab2".
To achieve the behavior you want - you need to define a getter method yourself which acts as an attribute (class_attribute does the same thing under the hood btw)
Solution
class A
def self.query
#query ||= self.generate_query
end
def self.generate_query
return "abcd"
end
end
class B < A
def self.generate_query
query_part_1 = "ab"
return query_part_1 + generate_query_part_2
end
def self.generate_query_part_2
return '2'
end
end
I'd like to reference an object while instantiating it in order to pass it to another object I'm instantiating. What I mean:
A.new(B.new(self))
In this case, self would refer to the scope in which I'm actually calling A.new. What I want is for self (or whatever other keyword) to refer to the newly instantiated A object, so that B would have a reference to A. Is there a way to do this?
The way you have written it (A.new(B.new(self))) is impossible, due to a circular reference.
In order to create an instance of A, you need an instance of B; in order to create the instance of B, you need the instance of A.
There are a few ways you tweak the implementation to make this possible, but you must first resolve this chicken-and-egg problem between the A and B. For example:
class A
def initialize
#b = yield(self)
end
end
class B
def initialize(a)
#a = a
end
end
A.new { |a| B.new(a) }
Note that in the above code, a is being initialized first. It is only being yielded in the scope after the object has been created.
Or, here's another way:
class A
def initialize
#b = B.new(self)
end
end
class B
def initialize(a)
#a = a
end
end
A.new
Like above, the instance of A is being created first. But this time, I've done all the initialization in one go rather than building it within the new() methed call.
One final example:
class A
attr_writer :b
def initialize
end
end
class B
def initialize(a)
#a = a
end
end
A.new.tap { |a| a.b = B.new(a) }
In this example, I have fully initialized a before defining its attribute of b. This could just as easily have been written in two lines of code, with a regular variable instead of the closure:
a = A.new
a.b = B.new(a)
I am learning some metaprogramming and I was stuck trying to find a method. Let's say I have the following class:
class MyClass
def self.my_method
end
def your_method
end
end
With the following code I can search for each method in the object space:
type = Class
name = /^my_method$/
result = ObjectSpace.each_object(type).select do |o|
o.instance_methods(false).grep(name).size > 0 || o.methods.grep(name).size > 0
end
p result
And it finds it showing the following output:
[MyClass]
As the searcher code also searches for instance methods, it shows the same output when looking for your_method.
Even with if I add a singleton method to an object:
mc = MyClass.new
def mc.our_method
end
Just changing the searcher like this:
type = Object
name = /^our_method$/
result = ObjectSpace.each_object(type).select do |o|
o.methods.grep(name).size > 0
end
p result
It also finds it:
[#<MyClass:0x8f86760>]
The question is, how do I find a method defined in the top level object? This method:
def hidden
end
Besides, which is the current class when defining a method like this?
Which is the current class when defining a method like this?
We can easily figure out what object we’re in by inspecting self in this top level scope:
self #=> main
self.class #=> Object
So we’re not in a Class, but an instance of Object which is dubbed “main”.
How do I find a method defined in the top level object?
This is where it gets interesting. The top-level scope object in Ruby behaves specially, but it’s relatively easy to discover where a method here defined lives:
def foo; :bar; end
method(:foo).owner #=> Object
Object.new.foo #=> NoMethodError: private method `foo' called
Object.new.send(:foo) #=> :bar
So methods defined at the top-level are made (private*) instance methods of Object. The reason your ”searcher” cannot find it is because these methods are private, and neither methods nor instance_methods include private methods, instead you need private_methods and private_instance_methods:
Object.instance_methods.include?(:foo) #=> false
Object.private_instance_methods.include?(:foo) #=> true
* Note that Pry (at least v0.10.1) alters this to make methods defined at top-level in its REPL public.
If you had this:
def my_method() end
class A
def self.my_method() end
end
class B < A
def my_method() end
end
class C
def my_method() end
end
and wanted to find methods named 'my_method' that you've created, you could do this:
ObjectSpace.each_object(Class).select do |o|
o.instance_methods(false).include?(:my_method)
end
#=> [C, B]
ObjectSpace.each_object(Class).select do |o|
o.methods(false).include?(:my_method)
end
#=> [A]
ObjectSpace.each_object(Class).select do |o|
o.private_instance_methods(false).include?(:my_method)
end
#=> [Object]
I need to make a program in ruby to generate a robot name like KU765 or NG274 style
and to store them and check it to avoid repetition.
I also need to make a "reset" method to delete all stored names and start again.
This program is not working for some reason. I hope somebody helps me to find the mistake.
Thanks a lot.
class Robot
attr_accessor :named , :stored_names , :rl
def self.name
new.name
end
##rl = "_ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ"
def name
named = ""
named << ##rl[rand(26).to_i]
named << ##rl[rand(26).to_i]
named << rand(100..999).to_s
named.save_name
named.check_name
end
def save_name
stored_names = []
stored_names << named
end
def check_name
stored_names.uniq!
end
def reset
stored_names = Array.new
end
end
Here's another way to construct the Robot class that you may wish to consider. (My answers are not normally this long or detailed, but I wrote this in part to clarify aspects of Ruby's object model in my own mind. I hope it might help others do the same.)
Code
PREFACE = ('A'..'Z').to_a << ?_
SUFFIX = ('0'..'9').to_a
PREFACE_SIZE = 2
SUFFIX_SIZE = 3
class Robot
def self.reset() #bots = [] end
reset
def self.new() (#bots << super).last end
def self.bots() #bots end
def self.delete(bot) #bots.delete(bot) end
def self.bot_names() #bots.map { |b| b.name } end
attr_reader :name
def initialize() #name = add_name end
private
def add_name
loop do
#name = gen_name
return #name unless self.class.bot_names.include?(#name)
end
end
def gen_name
PREFACE.sample(PREFACE_SIZE).join << SUFFIX.sample(SUFFIX_SIZE).join
end
end
Example
Robot.bots #=> []
robbie = Robot.new #=> #<Robot:0x000001019f4988 #name="AP436">
robbie.name #=> "AP436"
Robot.bots #=> [#<Robot:0x000001019f4988 #name="AP436">]
r2d2 = Robot.new #=> #<Robot:0x000001019cd450 #name="KL628">
r2d2.name #=> "KL628"
Robot.bots #=> [#<Robot:0x000001019f4988 #name="AP436">,
# #<Robot:0x000001019cd450 #name="KL628">]
Robot.bot_names #=> ["AP436", "KL628"]
Robot.delete(robbie) #=> #<Robot:0x000001019f4988 #name="AP436">
Robot.bots #=> [#<Robot:0x000001019cd450 #name="KL628">]
Robot.bot_names #=> ["KL628"]
Robot.reset #=> []
c3po = Robot.new #=> #<Robot:0x000001018ff8c0 #name="VO975">
Robot.bots #=> [#<Robot:0x000001018ff8c0 #name="VO975">]
Explanation
When the class is parsed, the class method reset is first created, then the line reset is executed. As self => Robot when that occurs, the class method reset is executed, initializing #bots to an empty array.
The responsibility for saving and modifying a list of instances of Robot lies with the class. This list is held in the class instance variable #bots.
Instance of Robot are created by invoking Robot::new, which allocates memory and then invokes the (private) instance method initialize. Where is new? Since we have not defined it as a class method in Robot, there are two possibilities: it is inherited from one of Robot's ancestors (Robot.ancestors => [Robot, Object, Kernel, BasicObject]) or it is an instance method of the class Class, as that is the class for which Robot is an instance (i.e., Robot.class => Class) Let's find out which: Class.instance_method(:new) => #<UnboundMethod: Class#new> (or Class.instance_methods.include?(:new) => true), Object.method(:new) => #<Method: Class#new>. It's both! But that makes sense, because all classes are instances of Class, including Robot's superclass, Object. #<Method: Class#new> returned by Object.method(:new) shows new is defined in Class (which can alternatively be seen with Robot.method(:new).owner => Class. Very cool, eh? If you didn't know this already, and can follow what I've said in this paragraph, you've just learned the essence of Ruby's object model!
Suppose we add the class method new, shown below, to Robot. super invokes the class method Object::new (which is the instance method Class#new), passing any arguments of new (here there aren't any). Object::new returns the instance that it creates, which Robot::new in turn returns. Therefore, this method would simply be a conduit and and have no effect on the results.
def self.new
super
end
We can make a small change to the above method to add a copy of the instance that is created by Object::new to the array #bots:
def self.new
instance = super
#bots << instance
instance
end
I have written this a little more compactly as:
def self.new
(#bots << super).last
end
I've used the method Array#sample to randomly draw PREFACE_SIZE characters from PREFACE and SUFFIX_SIZE characters from SUFFIX_SIZE. sample samples without replacement, so you will not get, for example, "UU112". If you want to sample with replacement, replace the method gen_name with the following:
def gen_name
str = PREFACE_SIZE.times.with_object('') { |_,s| s << PREFACE.sample }
SUFFIX_SIZE.times { str << SUFFIX.sample }
str
end
I have created a class method bots to return the value of the class instance variable #bots. This could alternatively be done by defining a read accessor for #bots on Robots' singleton class:
class << self
attr_reader :name
end
When Robot.reset is invoked, what happens to all the instances of Robot it had contained? Will they be left to wander the forest, rejected and homeless? In languages like C you need to release their memory before casting them aside. In Ruby and many other modern languages that's not necessary (and generally can't be done). Ruby's "garbage collection" keeps track of all objects, and kills off (after releasing memory) any that are no longer referenced by any other object. Nice, eh?
The task itself is not hard, but I don't like the way your code is organised. This is what I would do in the first stage:
class Robot
class Name < String
class << self
def sign
"#{[*?A..?Z].sample}#{[*?A..?Z].sample}"
end
def number
"#{rand 1..9}#{rand 0..9}#{rand 0..9}"
end
def new
super << sign << number
end
end
end
end
And then:
Robot::Name.new
When constructing a list of names it is easy to check that they are unique. This is how I'd go about it:
class Robot
class Names < Array
def self.generate n
new.tap { |array| n.times do array.add_random_name end }
end
def add_random_name
name = Name.new
include?( name ) ? add_random_name : self << name
end
end
end
And then:
Robot::Names.generate 7
def save_name
stored_names = []
stored_names << named
end
Every time, you create a name, and call save_name you delete all previously created names, by assigning an empty array to stored_names
EDIT:
There were a few more errors, let me first post a working solution:
class Robot
attr_accessor :named , :stored_names , :rl
def initialize()
#stored_names = []
end
##rl = "_ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ".chars.to_a
def name
#named = ""
#named << ##rl.sample
#named << ##rl.sample
#named << rand(100..999).to_s
save_name
check_name
end
def save_name
#stored_names << #named
end
def check_name
#stored_names.uniq!
end
def reset
#stored_names = Array.new
end
end
To access the members of your object, you have to prefix them with #.
You called save_name and check_name on #named, which is a string and doesn't provide these methods
#stored_names must be initialized to an empty array, before you can push elements into it with <<. This is normally done in the class's constructor initialize()
I understand this isn't efficient, but this will work.
letters = [*'A'..'Z'] =>
numbers = [*100..999]
names = []
2.times{names.push(letters.shuffle.first)} => Randomizing array and choosing element
names.push(numbers.shuffle.first)
names.join => Creates a String object out of the array elements
This isn't pretty, but it gets the job done.
This is how I automate Cary's approach with my y_support/name_magic:
require 'y_support/all'
class Robot
★ NameMagic
def name_yourself
begin
self.name = "#{[*?A..?Z].sample( 2 ).join}#{rand 100..999}"
rescue NameError; retry end
end
end
3.times { Robot.new.name_yourself }
Robot.instances #=> [PR489, NS761, OE663]
Robot.forget "PR489"
Robot.instances #=> [NS761, OE663]
Robot.forget_all_instances
Robot.instances #=> []
Robot.new.name_yourself
Robot.instances #=> [IB573]
Let's say I have a class Foo and the constructor takes 2 parameters.
Based on these parameters the initialize method does some heavy calculations and stores them as variables in the instance of the class. Object created.
Now I want to optimize this and create a cache of these objects. When creating a new Foo object, I want to return a existing one from the cache if the parameters match. How can I do this?
I currently have a self.new_using_cache(param1, param2), but I would love to have this integrated in the normal Foo.new().
Is this possible in any way?
I can also deduct that using .new() combined with a cache is not really syntactical correct.
That would mean that the method should be called new_or_from_cache().
clarification
It's not just about the heavy calculation, it's also preferred because of limiting the amount of duplicate objects. I don't want 5000 objects in memory, when I can have 50 unique ones from a cache. So I really need to customize the .new method, not just the cached values.
class Foo
##cache = {}
def self.new(value)
if ##cache[value]
##cache[value]
else
##cache[value] = super(value)
end
end
def initialize(value)
#value = value
end
end
puts Foo.new(1).object_id #2148123860
puts Foo.new(2).object_id #2148123820 (different from first instance)
puts Foo.new(1).object_id #2148123860 (same as first instance)
You can actually define self.new, then call super if you actually want to use Class#new.
Also, this totally approach prevents any instantiation from ever occurring if a new instance isn't actually needed. This is die to the fact the initialize method doesn't actually make the decision.
Here's a solution I came up with by defining a generic caching module. The module expects your class to implement the "retrieve_from_cache" and "store_in_cache" methods. If those methods don't exist, it doesn't attempt to do any fancy caching.
module CacheInitializer
def new(*args)
if respond_to?(:retrieve_from_cache) &&
cache_hit = retrieve_from_cache(*args)
cache_hit
else
object = super
store_in_cache(object, *args) if respond_to?(:store_in_cache)
object
end
end
end
class MyObject
attr_accessor :foo, :bar
extend CacheInitializer
#cache = {}
def initialize(foo, bar)
#foo = foo
#bar = bar
end
def self.retrieve_from_cache(foo, bar)
# grab the object from the cache
#cache[cache_key(foo, bar)]
end
def self.store_in_cache(object, foo, bar)
# write back to cache
#cache[cache_key(foo, bar)] = object
end
private
def self.cache_key(foo, bar)
foo + bar
end
end
Something like this?
class Foo
##cache = {}
def initialize prm1, prm2
if ##cache.key?([prm1, prm2]) then #prm1, #prm2 = ##cache[[prm1, prm2]] else
#prm1 = ...
#prm2 = ...
##cache[[prm1, prm2]] = [#prm1, #prm2]
end
end
end
Edited
To not create an instance when the parameters are the same as before,
class Foo
##cache = {}
def self.new prm1, prm2
return if ##cache.key?([prm1, prm2])
#prm1 = ...
#prm2 = ...
##cache[[prm1, prm2]] = [#prm1, #prm2]
super
end
end
p Foo.new(1, 2)
p Foo.new(3, 4)
p Foo.new(1, 2)
# => #<Foo:0x897c4f0>
# => #<Foo:0x897c478>
# => nil
You could use a class-level instance variable to store results from previous object instantiations:
class Foo
#object_cache = {}
def initialize(param1, param2)
#foo1 = #object_cache[param1] || #object_cache[param1] = expensive_calculation
#foo2 = #object_cache[param2] || #object_cache[param2] = expensive_calculation
end
private
def expensive_calculation
...
enf
end
As you probably know you have reinvented the factory method design pattern and it's a perfectly valid solution using your name for the factory method. In fact, it's probably better to do it without redefining new if anyone else is going to have to understand it.
But, it can be done. Here is my take:
class Test
##cache = {}
class << self
alias_method :real_new, :new
end
def self.new p1
o = ##cache[p1]
if o
s = "returning cached object"
else
##cache[p1] = o = real_new(p1)
s = "created new object"
end
puts "%s (%d: %x)" % [s, p1, o.object_id]
o
end
def initialize p
puts "(initialize #{p})"
end
end
Test.new 1
Test.new 2
Test.new 1
Test.new 2
Test.new 3
And this results in:
(initialize 1)
created new object (1: 81176de0)
(initialize 2)
created new object (2: 81176d54)
returning cached object (1: 81176de0)
returning cached object (2: 81176d54)
(initialize 3)