I have a file required.rb required by other files main.rb and tester.rb, each of which is invoked separately and run separately.
Within required.rb, I want to require all files in a subdirectory of the required file. The whole thing looks something like this:
main.rb
lib/
required.rb
req_files/
req1.rb
req2.rb
req3.rb
tester/
tester.rb
The code to import the required files looks like:
Dir[Dir.pwd + "/req_files/*.rb"].each do |file|
require file
end
In suggested strategies I have seen, be it utilizing Dir.pwd or __FILE__, the context applied to required.rb's location is the context of whichever original file required it in the first place, which means that I can't support requiring from both of those files separately with the current setup.
Is there a way to denote a path relative to the actual required.rb?
EDIT :
It's not though, because changing require to require_relative doesn't change the fact that Dir[Dir.pwd + "/req_files/*.rb"] and more specifically Dir.pwd resolves with respect to the original file (main or tester), so it cannot be expressed as is in required and work for both entry points
Also note that required.rb is required via require_relative already from both main.rb and tester.rb.
Is there a way to denote a path relative to the actual required.rb
Yes, kinda. There's another method for this.
http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.4.2/Kernel.html#method-i-require_relative
require_relative(string) → true or false
Ruby tries to load the library named string relative to the requiring file’s path. If the file’s path cannot be determined a LoadError is raised. If a file is loaded true is returned and false otherwise.
I was incorrect regarding __FILE__; Using File.dirname(__FILE__) instead of Dir.pwd works for giving the directory of the actual file versus the directory of the invoking file.
Related
I have a class defined in one file , say testAAA.rb
in the directory, I have another file
I found the following are all wrong
require "testAAA"
require "testAAA.rb"
load "testAAA"
it seems that I can only use load "testAAA.rb"
I think using load "testAAA.rb" looks ugly, how can I make it correct to use "require testAAA" in this case
require searches for files in the load path (which is in the $LOAD_PATH global, aliased as $:), and the current directory isn’t on the load path by default (it used to be in earlier versions of Ruby).
The are a few ways to require the file you want, the simplest here is probably to use require_relative:
require_relative "testAAA"
This is pretty much the same as something like this, which explicitly constructs an absolute path to the required file based on the first file:
require File.expand_path("../testAAA", __FILE__)
You could also explicitly load the file relative to the current working directory using ./:
require "./testAAA"
Note this isn’t the same as requiring the file relative to the first file, the working directory may not be the same directory as where the first file is. They will happen to be the same if you start your program in the same directory.
You could also add the directory in question to the load path. You probably don’t want to be doing this for simple scripts, it is more useful when creating larger apps:
$LOAD_PATH.unshift File.dirname(__FILE__) # or whatever directory you want to add
require 'foo'
If you are using the load method you must include the extension .rb. If you are using the require statement, you leave out the extension. Examples are below;
load 'yourfilehere.rb'
require 'yourfilehere'
I've got a project structure as follows:
info.config (just a JSON file w/ prefs+creds)
main.rb
tasks/
test.rb
In both main.rb (at the root of the project), and test.rb (under the tasks folder), I want to be able to read and parse the info.config file. I've figured out how to do that in main.rb with the following:
JSON.parse(File.read('info.config'))
Of course, that doesn't work in test.rb.
Question: How can I read the file from a test.rb even though it's one level deeper in the hierarchy?
Appreciate any guidance I can get! Thanks!
Use relative path:
path = File.join(
File.dirname(File.dirname(File.absolute_path(__FILE__))),
'info.config'
)
JSON.parse(File.read(path))
File.dirname(File.absolute_path(__FILE__)) will give you the directory where test.rb resides. -> (1)
File.dirname(File.dirname(File.absolute_path(__FILE__))) will give you parent directory of (1).
Reference: File::absolute_path, File::dirname
UPDATE
Using File::expand_path is more readable.
path = File.expand_path('../../info.config', __FILE__)
JSON.parse(File.read(path))
What I usually do is:
Create file called environment or similar in your project root. This file has only one purpose - to extend load path:
require 'pathname'
ROOT_PATH = Pathname.new(File.dirname(__FILE__))
$:.unshift ROOT_PATH
Require this file at the beginning of your code. From now on every time you call require, you can use relative_path to you root directory, without worrying where file you are requiring it from is located.
When using File, you can simple do:
File.open(ROOT_PATH.join 'task', 'test.rb')
You can do as below using File::expand_path :
path = File.expand_path("info.config","#{File.dirname(__FILE__)}/..")
JSON.parse(File.read(path))
File.dirname(__FILE__) will give you the path as "root_path_of_your_projet/tasks/".
"#{File.dirname(__FILE__)}/.." will give you the path as "root_path_of_your_projet/". .. means go one level up from the current directory.
File.expand_path("info.config","root_path_of_your_projet/") will give you the actual path to the file as "root_path_of_your_projet/info.config".
You can also use __dir__ instead of File.dirname(__FILE__).
__dir__ : Returns the canonicalized absolute path of the directory of the file from which this method is called.
Hope that explanation helps.
I have this directory structure:
project_dir
spec
person
person_invalid_address_examples.yaml
person_spec.rb
rakefile.rb
The person_spec.rb has this piece of code in it:
describe "Create person tests"
...
context "Person with invalid address" do
invalid_address_examples = []
File.open("person_invalid_address_examples.yaml", "r") do |file|
invalid_address_examples = YAML::load(file)
end
invalid_address_examples.each do |example|
it "Does not allow to create person with #{example[:description]}" do
person.address = example[:value]
result = person.create
result.should_not be_success
end
end
end
...
end
Now when I run from the person directory rspec person_spec.rb everything works as expected. But if I run RSpec rake task from the rakefile I get No such file or directory error... The problem is obviously present also the other way round - if I configure filename with path relative to the rakefile location then RSpec rake task works fine but I get No such file or directory error from the rspec runner.. Is there a way to configure filename with path so that it is working for the RSpec rake task and Rspec runner at the same time?
Whether your File.open works depends on the load path -- ruby looks up that relative path in the dirs in the current load path. You can look at the load path in the special $: variable.
Try looking at the value of this variable compared between both methods of executing the spec, and see how/if it differs.
It may be that the current working directory (basically, what directory you executed the command from, shows up in a list of paths as .) is on the load path, and the current working directory ends up different in your two different methods of running the spec.
Where is your yaml file located? Is your YAML file used only for testing, can you put it wherever you want?
You have various options, but they all depend on supplying either an absolute path, or a relative path that will always be on the load path.
Move the yml file to somewhere that is always on the load path. Your spec dir is probably already on the load path. You can put your yml in ./spec/example.yml. Or put your yml in a subdir, but reference that subdir in the open too -- spec/support/data/examples.yml, and then open "data/examples.yml" (starting from a dir on the load path, data/examples.yml will resolve).
Or, ignoring the load path, you could use the special __FILE__ variable to construct the complete path to your yml file, from it's relative location to the current file. __FILE__ is the file path of the source file where the code referencing it is.
Or, probably better than 2, you could add a directory of example data to the load path in your spec_helper.rb, by constructing a path with __FILE__, and then adding it to the $: variable. For instance, a example_data directory.
Probably #1 is sufficient for your needs though. Put the yml inside your spec directory -- or put it in a subdir of your spec directory, but include that subdir in the open argument.
It's because of
File.open("person_invalid_address_examples.yaml", "r")
It opens the file where the rspec is running.
In your case you should define file more apparently something like this:
file_path = File.expand_path("person_invalid_address_examples.yaml", File.dirname(__FILE__))
File.open(file_path, "r")
I have a RSpec test for a class in /lib/classes which needs access to a zip file (no upload). The file is stored in /spec/fixtures/files/test.zip. How do I input the correct path so it's environment agnostic, i.e. without absolute path?
Rails.root will give you the app root, so
Rails.root.join "spec/fixtures/files/test.zip"
will give you the absolute path of your file, agnostic of the location of the app on your hard drive.
I've tackled this issue recently and here's what I came up with:
Define a constant in your spec_helper.rb (or equivalent) pointing to RSpec root:
RSPEC_ROOT = File.dirname __FILE__
Use this variable in your *_spec.rb (or equivalent) test files:
require 'spec_helper'
File.open("#{RSPEC_ROOT}/resources/example_data.json")
Why this solution?
It doesn't make use of the location of the test file which may be
subject to change (spec_helper is likely not)
It doesn't require any additions to test files other than the already existing
require 'spec_helper'
It doesn't depend on Rails (unlike Rails.root)
Here's a Gist: https://gist.github.com/thisismydesign/9dc142f89b82a07e413a45a5d2983b07
As far as I know (from looking every month or two) there is no better way that building something in spec_helper that uses the __FILE__ value to grab the path to a know bit of content, then build your own helpers on top of that.
You can obviously use a path relative to __FILE__ in the individual *_spec.rb file as well.
What is the difference between require_relative and require in Ruby?
Just look at the docs:
require_relative complements the builtin method require by allowing you to load a file that is relative to the file containing the require_relative statement.
For example, if you have unit test classes in the "test" directory, and data for them under the test "test/data" directory, then you might use a line like this in a test case:
require_relative "data/customer_data_1"
require_relative is a convenient subset of require
require_relative('path')
equals:
require(File.expand_path('path', File.dirname(__FILE__)))
if __FILE__ is defined, or it raises LoadError otherwise.
This implies that:
require_relative 'a' and require_relative './a' require relative to the current file (__FILE__).
This is what you want to use when requiring inside your library, since you don't want the result to depend on the current directory of the caller.
eval('require_relative("a.rb")') raises LoadError because __FILE__ is not defined inside eval.
This is why you can't use require_relative in RSpec tests, which get evaled.
The following operations are only possible with require:
require './a.rb' requires relative to the current directory
require 'a.rb' uses the search path ($LOAD_PATH) to require. It does not find files relative to current directory or path.
This is not possible with require_relative because the docs say that path search only happens when "the filename does not resolve to an absolute path" (i.e. starts with / or ./ or ../), which is always the case for File.expand_path.
The following operation is possible with both, but you will want to use require as it is shorter and more efficient:
require '/a.rb' and require_relative '/a.rb' both require the absolute path.
Reading the source
When the docs are not clear, I recommend that you take a look at the sources (toggle source in the docs). In some cases, it helps to understand what is going on.
require:
VALUE rb_f_require(VALUE obj, VALUE fname) {
return rb_require_safe(fname, rb_safe_level());
}
require_relative:
VALUE rb_f_require_relative(VALUE obj, VALUE fname) {
VALUE base = rb_current_realfilepath();
if (NIL_P(base)) {
rb_loaderror("cannot infer basepath");
}
base = rb_file_dirname(base);
return rb_require_safe(rb_file_absolute_path(fname, base), rb_safe_level());
}
This allows us to conclude that
require_relative('path')
is the same as:
require(File.expand_path('path', File.dirname(__FILE__)))
because:
rb_file_absolute_path =~ File.expand_path
rb_file_dirname1 =~ File.dirname
rb_current_realfilepath =~ __FILE__
Summary
Use require for installed gems
Use require_relative for local files
require uses your $LOAD_PATH to find the files.
require_relative uses the current location of the file using the statement
require
Require relies on you having installed (e.g. gem install [package]) a package somewhere on your system for that functionality.
When using require you can use the "./" format for a file in the current directory, e.g. require "./my_file" but that is not a common or recommended practice and you should use require_relative instead.
require_relative
This simply means include the file 'relative to the location of the file with the require_relative statement'. I generally recommend that files should be "within" the current directory tree as opposed to "up", e.g. don't use
require_relative '../../../filename'
(up 3 directory levels) within the file system because that tends to create unnecessary and brittle dependencies. However in some cases if you are already 'deep' within a directory tree then "up and down" another directory tree branch may be necessary. More simply perhaps, don't use require_relative for files outside of this repository (assuming you are using git which is largely a de-facto standard at this point, late 2018).
Note that require_relative uses the current directory of the file with the require_relative statement (so not necessarily your current directory that you are using the command from). This keeps the require_relative path "stable" as it always be relative to the file requiring it in the same way.
From Ruby API:
require_relative complements the
builtin method require by allowing you
to load a file that is relative to the
file containing the require_relative
statement.
When you use require to load a file,
you are usually accessing
functionality that has been properly
installed, and made accessible, in
your system. require does not offer a
good solution for loading files within
the project’s code. This may be useful
during a development phase, for
accessing test data, or even for
accessing files that are "locked" away
inside a project, not intended for
outside use.
For example, if you have unit test
classes in the "test" directory, and
data for them under the test
"test/data" directory, then you might
use a line like this in a test case:
require_relative "data/customer_data_1"
Since neither
"test" nor "test/data" are likely to
be in Ruby’s library path (and for
good reason), a normal require won’t
find them. require_relative is a good
solution for this particular problem.
You may include or omit the extension
(.rb or .so) of the file you are
loading.
path must respond to to_str.
You can find the documentation at http://extensions.rubyforge.org/rdoc/classes/Kernel.html
The top answers are correct, but deeply technical. For those newer to Ruby:
require_relative will most likely be used to bring in code from another file that you wrote.
for example, what if you have data in ~/my-project/data.rb and you want to include that in ~/my-project/solution.rb? in solution.rb you would add require_relative 'data'.
it is important to note these files do not need to be in the same directory. require_relative '../../folder1/folder2/data' is also valid.
require will most likely be used to bring in code from a library someone else wrote.
for example, what if you want to use one of the helper functions provided in the active_support library? you'll need to install the gem with gem install activesupport and then in the file require 'active_support'.
require 'active_support/all'
"FooBar".underscore
Said differently--
require_relative requires a file specifically pointed to relative to the file that calls it.
require requires a file included in the $LOAD_PATH.
I just saw the RSpec's code has some comment on require_relative being O(1) constant and require being O(N) linear. So probably the difference is that require_relative is the preferred one than require.
I want to add that when using Windows you can use require './1.rb' if the script is run local or from a mapped network drive but when run from an UNC \\servername\sharename\folder path you need to use require_relative './1.rb'.
I don't mingle in the discussion which to use for other reasons.
absolute path
require './app/example_file.rb'
shortened name
require_relative 'example_file'