How can I do the opposite .include? - ruby

Question

So the goal here is to print the index of the element if the element is in the array or print -1 if the element is not in the array. I have to do this using loops. PLEASE HELP!
def element_index(element, my_array)
while my_array.map.include? element do
puts my_array.index(element)
break
end
until my_array.include? element do
puts -1
break
end
end
p element_index("c", ["a","b","c"])

Answer 1

If it's OK to use Array#index, then
def element_index(elem, collection)
collection.index(elem) || -1
end
Or if it's a homework that you should not use Array#index, or you want to do this on arbitrary collections, then
def element_index(elem, collection)
collection.each_with_index.reduce(-1) do |default, (curr, index)|
curr == elem ? (return index) : default
end
end
By the way, I always turn to Enumerable#reduce when I want to iterate over a collection (array, map, set, ...) to compute one value.

Answer 2

This is an easy way but maybe it doesn't meet the criteria for "using loops":
def element_index(x, arr)
arr.index(x) || -1
end
element_index("c", ["a","b","c"]) #=> 2
element_index("d", ["a","b","c"]) #=> -1
To explicitly use a loop:
def element_index(x, arr)
arr.each_index.find { |i| arr[i] == x } || -1
end
As pointed out in the comments, we could instead write
arr.each_index.find(->{-1}) { |i| arr[i] == x }
element_index("c", ["a","b","c"]) #=> 2
element_index("d", ["a","b","c"]) #=> -1

Answer 3

I know this is an assignment, but I'll first cover this as if it were real code because it's teaching you some not-so-great Ruby.
Ruby has a method for doing this, Array#index. It returns the index of the first matching element (there can be more than one), or nil.
p ["a","b","c"].index("c") # 2
p ["a","b","c"].index("d") # nil
Returning -1 is inadvisable. nil is a safer "this thing does not exist" value because its never a valid value, always false (-1 and 0 are true in Ruby), and does not compare equal to anything but itself. Returning -1 indicates whomever came up with this exercise is converting it from another language like C.
If you must, a simple wrapper will do.
def element_index(element, array)
idx = array.index(element)
if idx == nil
return -1
else
return idx
end
end
I have to do this using loops.
Ok, it's homework. Let's rewrite Array#index.
The basic idea is to loop through each element until you find one which matches. Iterating through each element of an array is done with Array#each, but you need each index, that's done with Array#each_index. The element can be then gotten with array[idx].
def index(array, want)
# Run the block for each index of the array.
# idx will be assigned the index: 0, 1, 2, ...
array.each_index { |idx|
# If it's the element we want, return the index immediately.
# No need to spend more time searching.
if array[idx] == want
return idx
end
}
# Otherwise return -1.
# nil is better, but the assignment wants -1.
return -1
end
# It's better to put the thing you're working on first,
# and the thing you're looking for second.
# Its like verb( subject, object ) or subject.verb(object) if this were a method.
p index(["a","b","c"], "c")
p index(["a","b","c"], "d")
Get used to using list.each { |thing| ... }, that's how you loop in Ruby, along with many other similar methods. There's little call for while and for loops in Ruby. Instead, you ask the object to loop and tell it what to do with each thing. It's very powerful.

Answer 4

I have to do this using loops.
You approach is very creative. You have re-created an if statement using a while loop:
while expression do
# ...
break
end
Is equivalent to:
if expression
# ...
end
With expression being something like array.include? element.
How can I do the opposite?
To invert a (boolean) expression, you just prepend !:
if !expression
# ...
end
Applied to your while-hack:
while !expression do
# ...
break
end
The whole method would look like this:
def element_index(element, my_array)
while my_array.include? element do
puts my_array.index(element)
break
end
while !my_array.include? element do
puts -1
break
end
end
element_index("c", ["a","b","c"])
# prints 2
element_index("d", ["a","b","c"])
# prints -1
As I said at the beginning, this approach is very "creative". You are probably supposed to find the index using a loop (see Schwern's answer) instead of calling the built-in index.