Related
I have a nested hash, to which I need to add more deeply nested property/value pairs.
Sample A:
a = {}
a['x']['y']['z'] << 8
Normally I'd have to do this:
Sample B:
a = {}
a['x'] ||= a['x'] = {}
a['x']['y'] ||= a['x']['y'] = {}
a['x']['y']['z'] ||= a['x']['y']['z'] = []
Otherwise, I will get undefined method '<<' for nil:NillClass.
Is there some type of shorthand or function along the lines of code A instead of code B?
The most elegant solution for the deep-nested hash of any depth would be:
hash = Hash.new { |h, k| h[k] = h.dup.clear }
or, even better (credits to #Stefan)
hash = Hash.new { |h, k| h[k] = Hash.new(&h.default_proc) }
That way one might access any level:
hash[:a1][:a2][:a3][:a4] = :foo
#⇒ {:a1=>{:a2=>{:a3=>{:a4=>:foo}}}}
The idea is to clone the default_proc within the hash itself.
To give a little backgroud, there's a method Hash#dig which is present since ruby 2.3. With this you can safely attempt to read any number of keys:
{a: {b: {c: 1}}}.dig :a, :b, :c # => 1
{}.dig :a, :b, :c # => nil
of course, this doesn't solve your problem. You're looking for a write version. This has been proposed but rejected in Ruby core in the form of Hash#bury.
This method does almost exactly what you are looking for, however it can only set nested hash values and not append to nested arrays:
# start with empty hash
hash = {}
# define the inner array
hash.bury :x, :y, :z, []
# add to the inner array
hash[:x][:y][:z] << :some_val
You can get this method through the ruby-bury gem, or alternatively you can take their implementation from their source code
Here are a couple of ways that could be done.
arr = [:a1, :a2, :a3, :a4, :foo]
Use Enumerable#reduce (aka inject)
def hashify(arr)
arr[0..-3].reverse_each.reduce(arr[-2]=>arr[-1]) { |h,x| { x=>h } }
end
hashify(arr)
#=> {:a1=>{:a2=>{:a3=>{:a4=>:foo}}}}
Use recursion
def hashify(arr)
first, *rest = arr
rest.size == 1 ? { first=>rest.first } : { first=>hashify(rest) }
end
hashify(arr)
#=> {:a1=>{:a2=>{:a3=>{:a4=>:foo}}}}
You can consider using the get and set methods from the rodash gem in order to set a deeply nested value into a hash with a default value.
require 'rodash'
a = {}
key = ['x', 'y', 'z']
default_value = []
value = 8
current_value = Rodash.get(a, key, default_value)
Rodash.set(a, key, current_value << value)
a
# => {"x"=>{"y"=>{"z"=>[8]}}}
I use the following to deeply set/initialize arrays/hashes using a list of keys. If they keys are ints, it assumes indexing into an array, otherwise it assumes a hash:
def deep_set(target, path, value)
key = path.shift
return target[key] = value if path.empty?
child = target[key]
return deep_set(child, path, value) if child
deep_set(
target[key] = path[0].is_a?(Integer) ? [] : {},
path,
value,
)
end
Here is an example of using it:
target = {first: [:old_data]}
deep_set(target, [:first, 1, 1, :lol], 'foo')
puts target # {:first=>[:old_data, [nil, {:lol=>"foo"}]]}
It uses the fact that ruby allows you to set-and-expand arrays on the fly, which is a bit wonky, but works nicely here.
Typically, parsing XML or JSON returns a hash, array, or combination of them. Often, parsing through an invalid array leads to all sorts of TypeErrors, NoMethodErrors, unexpected nils, and the like.
For example, I have a response object and want to find the following element:
response['cars'][0]['engine']['5L']
If response is
{ 'foo' => { 'bar' => [1, 2, 3] } }
it will throw a NoMethodError exception, when all I want is to see is nil.
Is there a simple way to look for an element without resorting to lots of nil checks, rescues, or Rails try methods?
Casper was just before me, he used the same idea (don't know where i found it, is a time ago) but i believe my solution is more sturdy
module DeepFetch
def deep_fetch(*keys, &fetch_default)
throw_fetch_default = fetch_default && lambda {|key, coll|
args = [key, coll]
# only provide extra block args if requested
args = args.slice(0, fetch_default.arity) if fetch_default.arity >= 0
# If we need the default, we need to stop processing the loop immediately
throw :df_value, fetch_default.call(*args)
}
catch(:df_value){
keys.inject(self){|value,key|
block = throw_fetch_default && lambda{|*args|
# sneak the current collection in as an extra block arg
args << value
throw_fetch_default.call(*args)
}
value.fetch(key, &block) if value.class.method_defined? :fetch
}
}
end
# Overload [] to work with multiple keys
def [](*keys)
case keys.size
when 1 then super
else deep_fetch(*keys){|key, coll| coll[key]}
end
end
end
response = { 'foo' => { 'bar' => [1, 2, 3] } }
response.extend(DeepFetch)
p response.deep_fetch('cars') { nil } # nil
p response.deep_fetch('cars', 0) { nil } # nil
p response.deep_fetch('foo') { nil } # {"bar"=>[1, 2, 3]}
p response.deep_fetch('foo', 'bar', 0) { nil } # 1
p response.deep_fetch('foo', 'bar', 3) { nil } # nil
p response.deep_fetch('foo', 'bar', 0, 'engine') { nil } # nil
I tried to look through both the Hash documentation and also through Facets, but nothing stood out as far as I could see.
So you might want to implement your own solution. Here's one option:
class Hash
def deep_index(*args)
args.inject(self) { |e,arg|
break nil if e[arg].nil?
e[arg]
}
end
end
h1 = { 'cars' => [{'engine' => {'5L' => 'It worked'}}] }
h2 = { 'foo' => { 'bar' => [1, 2, 3] } }
p h1.deep_index('cars', 0, 'engine', '5L')
p h2.deep_index('cars', 0, 'engine', '5L')
p h2.deep_index('foo', 'bonk')
Output:
"It worked"
nil
nil
If you can live with getting an empty hash instead of nil when there is no key, then you can do it like this:
response.fetch('cars', {}).fetch(0, {}).fetch('engine', {}).fetch('5L', {})
or save some types by defining a method Hash#_:
class Hash; def _ k; fetch(k, {}) end end
response._('cars')._(0)._('engine')._('5L')
or do it at once like this:
["cars", 0, "engine", "5L"].inject(response){|h, k| h.fetch(k, {})}
For the sake of reference, there are several projects i know of that tackle the more general problem of chaining methods in the face of possible nils:
andand
ick
zucker's egonil
methodchain
probably others...
There's also been considerable discussion in the past:
Ruby nil-like object - One of many on SO
Null Objects and Falsiness - Great article by Avdi Grimm
The 28 Bytes of Ruby Joy! - Very interesting discussion following J-_-L's post
More idiomatic way to avoid errors when calling method on variable that may be nil? on ruby-talk
et cetera
Having said that, the answers already provided probably suffice for the more specific problem of chained Hash#[] access.
I would suggest an approach of injecting custom #[] method to instances we are interested in:
def weaken_checks_for_brackets_accessor inst
inst.instance_variable_set(:#original_get_element_method, inst.method(:[])) \
unless inst.instance_variable_get(:#original_get_element_method)
singleton_class = class << inst; self; end
singleton_class.send(:define_method, :[]) do |*keys|
begin
res = (inst.instance_variable_get(:#original_get_element_method).call *keys)
rescue
end
weaken_checks_for_brackets_accessor(res.nil? ? inst.class.new : res)
end
inst
end
Being called on the instance of Hash (Array is OK as all the other classes, having #[] defined), this method stores the original Hash#[] method unless it is already substituted (that’s needed to prevent stack overflow during multiple calls.) Then it injects the custom implementation of #[] method, returning empty class instance instead of nil/exception. To use the safe value retrieval:
a = { 'foo' => { 'bar' => [1, 2, 3] } }
p (weaken_checks_for_brackets_accessor a)['foo']['bar']
p "1 #{a['foo']}"
p "2 #{a['foo']['bar']}"
p "3 #{a['foo']['bar']['ghgh']}"
p "4 #{a['foo']['bar']['ghgh'][0]}"
p "5 #{a['foo']['bar']['ghgh'][0]['olala']}"
Yielding:
#⇒ [1, 2, 3]
#⇒ "1 {\"bar\"=>[1, 2, 3]}"
#⇒ "2 [1, 2, 3]"
#⇒ "3 []"
#⇒ "4 []"
#⇒ "5 []"
Since Ruby 2.3, the answer is dig
I have a hash like:
h = {
a: '/users/sign_up',
b: "/user/#{#user.id]}"
}
Later I do h[:b].
Hash values are initialized when hash itself is initialized. But I'd want #user.id to be invoked every time when h[:b] is invoked.
It seems to be not possible to do it with Ruby's hash. But is there some workaround to do it?
You can use lambdas for the values of the hash, and call the lambda when the actual value is needed, e.g.:
h = {
a: ->{'/users/sign_up'},
b: ->{"/user/#{#user.id}"}
}
h[:b].call
h = {}
h.default_proc = proc do |hash, key|
key == :b ? "/user/#{#user.id}" : nil
end
h[:a] #=> nil
h[:b] #=> "/user/<id>"
This question already has answers here:
Ruby Style: How to check whether a nested hash element exists
(16 answers)
How to avoid NoMethodError for nil elements when accessing nested hashes? [duplicate]
(4 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
I'm working a little utility written in ruby that makes extensive use of nested hashes. Currently, I'm checking access to nested hash elements as follows:
structure = { :a => { :b => 'foo' }}
# I want structure[:a][:b]
value = nil
if structure.has_key?(:a) && structure[:a].has_key?(:b) then
value = structure[:a][:b]
end
Is there a better way to do this? I'd like to be able to say:
value = structure[:a][:b]
And get nil if :a is not a key in structure, etc.
Traditionally, you really had to do something like this:
structure[:a] && structure[:a][:b]
However, Ruby 2.3 added a method Hash#dig that makes this way more graceful:
structure.dig :a, :b # nil if it misses anywhere along the way
There is a gem called ruby_dig that will back-patch this for you.
Hash and Array have a method called dig.
value = structure.dig(:a, :b)
It returns nil if the key is missing at any level.
If you are using a version of Ruby older than 2.3, you can install a gem such as ruby_dig or hash_dig_and_collect, or implement this functionality yourself:
module RubyDig
def dig(key, *rest)
if value = (self[key] rescue nil)
if rest.empty?
value
elsif value.respond_to?(:dig)
value.dig(*rest)
end
end
end
end
if RUBY_VERSION < '2.3'
Array.send(:include, RubyDig)
Hash.send(:include, RubyDig)
end
The way I usually do this these days is:
h = Hash.new { |h,k| h[k] = {} }
This will give you a hash that creates a new hash as the entry for a missing key, but returns nil for the second level of key:
h['foo'] -> {}
h['foo']['bar'] -> nil
You can nest this to add multiple layers that can be addressed this way:
h = Hash.new { |h, k| h[k] = Hash.new { |hh, kk| hh[kk] = {} } }
h['bar'] -> {}
h['tar']['zar'] -> {}
h['scar']['far']['mar'] -> nil
You can also chain indefinitely by using the default_proc method:
h = Hash.new { |h, k| h[k] = Hash.new(&h.default_proc) }
h['bar'] -> {}
h['tar']['star']['par'] -> {}
The above code creates a hash whose default proc creates a new Hash with the same default proc. So, a hash created as a default value when a lookup for an unseen key occurs will have the same default behavior.
EDIT: More details
Ruby hashes allow you to control how default values are created when a lookup occurs for a new key. When specified, this behavior is encapsulated as a Proc object and is reachable via the default_proc and default_proc= methods. The default proc can also be specified by passing a block to Hash.new.
Let's break this code down a little. This is not idiomatic ruby, but it's easier to break it out into multiple lines:
1. recursive_hash = Hash.new do |h, k|
2. h[k] = Hash.new(&h.default_proc)
3. end
Line 1 declares a variable recursive_hash to be a new Hash and begins a block to be recursive_hash's default_proc. The block is passed two objects: h, which is the Hash instance the key lookup is being performed on, and k, the key being looked up.
Line 2 sets the default value in the hash to a new Hash instance. The default behavior for this hash is supplied by passing a Proc created from the default_proc of the hash the lookup is occurring in; ie, the default proc the block itself is defining.
Here's an example from an IRB session:
irb(main):011:0> recursive_hash = Hash.new do |h,k|
irb(main):012:1* h[k] = Hash.new(&h.default_proc)
irb(main):013:1> end
=> {}
irb(main):014:0> recursive_hash[:foo]
=> {}
irb(main):015:0> recursive_hash
=> {:foo=>{}}
When the hash at recursive_hash[:foo] was created, its default_proc was supplied by recursive_hash's default_proc. This has two effects:
The default behavior for recursive_hash[:foo] is the same as recursive_hash.
The default behavior for hashes created by recursive_hash[:foo]'s default_proc will be the same as recursive_hash.
So, continuing in IRB, we get the following:
irb(main):016:0> recursive_hash[:foo][:bar]
=> {}
irb(main):017:0> recursive_hash
=> {:foo=>{:bar=>{}}}
irb(main):018:0> recursive_hash[:foo][:bar][:zap]
=> {}
irb(main):019:0> recursive_hash
=> {:foo=>{:bar=>{:zap=>{}}}}
I made rubygem for this. Try vine.
Install:
gem install vine
Usage:
hash.access("a.b.c")
I think one of the most readable solutions is using Hashie:
require 'hashie'
myhash = Hashie::Mash.new({foo: {bar: "blah" }})
myhash.foo.bar
=> "blah"
myhash.foo?
=> true
# use "underscore dot" for multi-level testing
myhash.foo_.bar?
=> true
myhash.foo_.huh_.what?
=> false
value = structure[:a][:b] rescue nil
Solution 1
I suggested this in my question before:
class NilClass; def to_hash; {} end end
Hash#to_hash is already defined, and returns self. Then you can do:
value = structure[:a].to_hash[:b]
The to_hash ensures that you get an empty hash when the previous key search fails.
Solution2
This solution is similar in spirit to mu is too short's answer in that it uses a subclass, but still somewhat different. In case there is no value for a certain key, it does not use a default value, but rather creates a value of empty hash, so that it does not have the problem of confusion in assigment that DigitalRoss's answer has, as was pointed out by mu is too short.
class NilFreeHash < Hash
def [] key; key?(key) ? super(key) : self[key] = NilFreeHash.new end
end
structure = NilFreeHash.new
structure[:a][:b] = 3
p strucrture[:a][:b] # => 3
It departs from the specification given in the question, though. When an undefined key is given, it will return an empty hash instread of nil.
p structure[:c] # => {}
If you build an instance of this NilFreeHash from the beginning and assign the key-values, it will work, but if you want to convert a hash into an instance of this class, that may be a problem.
You could just build a Hash subclass with an extra variadic method for digging all the way down with appropriate checks along the way. Something like this (with a better name of course):
class Thing < Hash
def find(*path)
path.inject(self) { |h, x| return nil if(!h.is_a?(Thing) || h[x].nil?); h[x] }
end
end
Then just use Things instead of hashes:
>> x = Thing.new
=> {}
>> x[:a] = Thing.new
=> {}
>> x[:a][:b] = 'k'
=> "k"
>> x.find(:a)
=> {:b=>"k"}
>> x.find(:a, :b)
=> "k"
>> x.find(:a, :b, :c)
=> nil
>> x.find(:a, :c, :d)
=> nil
This monkey patch function for Hash should be easiest (at least for me). It also doesn't alter structure i.e. changing nil's to {}. It would still also apply even if you're reading a tree from a raw source e.g. JSON. It also doesn't need to produce empty hash objects as it goes or parse a string. rescue nil was actually a good easy solution for me as I'm brave enough for such a low risk but I find it to essentially have a drawback with performance.
class ::Hash
def recurse(*keys)
v = self[keys.shift]
while keys.length > 0
return nil if not v.is_a? Hash
v = v[keys.shift]
end
v
end
end
Example:
> structure = { :a => { :b => 'foo' }}
=> {:a=>{:b=>"foo"}}
> structure.recurse(:a, :b)
=> "foo"
> structure.recurse(:a, :x)
=> nil
What's also good is that you can play around saved arrays with it:
> keys = [:a, :b]
=> [:a, :b]
> structure.recurse(*keys)
=> "foo"
> structure.recurse(*keys, :x1, :x2)
=> nil
The XKeys gem will read and auto-vivify-on-write nested hashes (::Hash) or hashes and arrays (::Auto, based on the key/index type) with a simple, clear, readable, and compact syntax by enhancing #[] and #[]=. The sentinel symbol :[] will push onto the end of an array.
require 'xkeys'
structure = {}.extend XKeys::Hash
structure[:a, :b] # nil
structure[:a, :b, :else => 0] # 0 (contextual default)
structure[:a] # nil, even after above
structure[:a, :b] = 'foo'
structure[:a, :b] # foo
You can use the andand gem, but I'm becoming more and more wary of it:
>> structure = { :a => { :b => 'foo' }} #=> {:a=>{:b=>"foo"}}
>> require 'andand' #=> true
>> structure[:a].andand[:b] #=> "foo"
>> structure[:c].andand[:b] #=> nil
There is the cute but wrong way to do this. Which is to monkey-patch NilClass to add a [] method that returns nil. I say it is the wrong approach because you have no idea what other software may have made a different version, or what behavior change in a future version of Ruby can be broken by this.
A better approach is to create a new object that works a lot like nil but supports this behavior. Make this new object the default return of your hashes. And then it will just work.
Alternately you can create a simple "nested lookup" function that you pass the hash and the keys to, which traverses the hashes in order, breaking out when it can.
I would personally prefer one of the latter two approaches. Though I think it would be cute if the first was integrated into the Ruby language. (But monkey-patching is a bad idea. Don't do that. Particularly not to demonstrate what a cool hacker you are.)
Not that I would do it, but you can Monkeypatch in NilClass#[]:
> structure = { :a => { :b => 'foo' }}
#=> {:a=>{:b=>"foo"}}
> structure[:x][:y]
NoMethodError: undefined method `[]' for nil:NilClass
from (irb):2
from C:/Ruby/bin/irb:12:in `<main>'
> class NilClass; def [](*a); end; end
#=> nil
> structure[:x][:y]
#=> nil
> structure[:a][:y]
#=> nil
> structure[:a][:b]
#=> "foo"
Go with #DigitalRoss's answer. Yes, it's more typing, but that's because it's safer.
In my case, I needed a two-dimensional matrix where each cell is a list of items.
I found this technique which seems to work. It might work for the OP:
$all = Hash.new()
def $all.[](k)
v = fetch(k, nil)
return v if v
h = Hash.new()
def h.[](k2)
v = fetch(k2, nil)
return v if v
list = Array.new()
store(k2, list)
return list
end
store(k, h)
return h
end
$all['g1-a']['g2-a'] << '1'
$all['g1-a']['g2-a'] << '2'
$all['g1-a']['g2-a'] << '3'
$all['g1-a']['g2-b'] << '4'
$all['g1-b']['g2-a'] << '5'
$all['g1-b']['g2-c'] << '6'
$all.keys.each do |group1|
$all[group1].keys.each do |group2|
$all[group1][group2].each do |item|
puts "#{group1} #{group2} #{item}"
end
end
end
The output is:
$ ruby -v && ruby t.rb
ruby 1.9.2p0 (2010-08-18 revision 29036) [x86_64-linux]
g1-a g2-a 1
g1-a g2-a 2
g1-a g2-a 3
g1-a g2-b 4
g1-b g2-a 5
g1-b g2-c 6
I am currently trying out this:
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# System so that we chain methods together without worrying about nil
# values (a la Objective-c).
# Example:
# params[:foo].try?[:bar]
#
class Object
# Returns self, unless NilClass (see below)
def try?
self
end
end
class NilClass
class MethodMissingSink
include Singleton
def method_missing(meth, *args, &block)
end
end
def try?
MethodMissingSink.instance
end
end
I know the arguments against try, but it is useful when looking into things, like say, params.
I have this method in helper:
def get_hash_keys(hash)
hash.delete_if{|k, v| v.class != Hash}
return hash.keys
end
When I call get_hash_keys from another method in the same helper, it returns a blank array :
def datas_size
sum = 0
new_hash = {title: "This is a test", datas: {firstname: "foo", lastname: "bar"}}
new_hash.each do |k, v|
sum += v.size if get_hash_keys(new_hash).includes? k
end
return sum
end
I tested to change return hash.keys with fixed array, and I get it. Only keys function seems not to work. I also double checked my array in params.
Is there some specifications I ignore working inside helpers ?
Edit for #DRSE :
I start with hash that contains others hashes. I need to know size of each children hash. The point is when I call this function (get_hash_keys) from the views, it fails (return blank array), but from console it works (return keys).
More investigation this morning drive me to conclude may be this is a wrong usage of delete_if. My ununderstood solution is to replace :
def get_hash_keys(hash)
hash.delete_if{|k, v| v.class != Hash}
return hash.keys
end
with
def get_hash_keys(hash)
tmp_hash = hash.clone
tmp_hash.delete_if{|k, v| v.class != Hash}
return tmp_hash.keys
end
Nothing is wrong with hash.keys:
def get_new_keys(hash)
hash.delete_if{|k,v| k == :bar}
return hash.keys
end
get_new_keys({qux: :bar, bar: :baz}) # => [:qux]
This, on the other hand, is busted.
def display_keys(hash)
return "foo " + get_new_keys(hash)
end
Are you expecting an array to be returned? If so, that's not the way to go about it at all. You could do something like:
def display_keys(hash)
return [:foo].concat(get_new_keys(hash))
end
In which case, it'd do something like:
def display_keys(hash)
return [:foo].concat(get_new_keys(hash))
end
display_keys({qux: :bar, bar: :baz}) # => [:foo, :qux]
The .keys method returns and Array of keys in the Hash.
Your question is impossible to answer for two reasons:
You have not included the condition in your delete_if block. My
guess is that you are deleting all keys in the hash, so .keys is
returning [].
You have not described the output you are expecting.
On a side note, your method display_keys does not work in ruby 2.3. You cannot concatenate an Array and a String like that. It will throw a TypeError: no implicit conversion of Array into String
But taking my best guess at it the following code works just fine:
def get_new_keys(hash)
hash.delete_if{ |k,v| v % 2 == 0 }
return hash.keys
end
def display_keys(hash)
return ["foo"] + get_new_keys(hash)
end
hash = {
one: 1,
two: 2,
three: 3,
four: 4,
five: 5,
six: 6,
seven: 7,
eight: 8,
nine: 9,
ten: 10
}
Outputs:
pry(main)> display_keys( hash )
=> ["foo", :one, :three, :five, :seven, :nine]