I have a lot of Render Helper functions like
def generic_form_datetime_field(f,attribute_name, my_label ,selected_model_instance)
render(:partial => 'common_partials/generic_form/datetime_field',
:locals => {:f => f,
:attribute_name => attribute_name,
:my_label => my_label,
:selected_model_instance => selected_model_instance
})
end
notice the local field is full of duplicate keys and values from function parameters. What is the best practice around this? Is there a way to get the parameters from the method and put them as keys for the hash?
taking hash arguments
You can use a few different syntaxes to pull in named arguments as a hash. One is using the "double splat":
def func(**args)
puts args
end
func(a: 'aval', b: 3) # prints {:a=>"aval", :b=>3}
Another syntax you will see is:
def func(opts={})
puts opts
end
func(a: 'aval', b: 3) # prints: {:a=>"aval", :b=>3}
More info can be found in this blog post.
filtering the hash
If you want to be defensive, you can use a function that filters collections in general: select. Here's an example of how to only take values from a specified whitelist for hash keys:
h = {a: 'a', b: 'b', c: 'c'}
whitelist = [:a, :c]
h.select { |k, _| whitelist.include?(k) }
# result: {:a=>"a", :c=>"c"}
Related
Is there a better way to write this? basically I want to add an argument to a hash. if the argument is a key-val pair, then id like to add it as is. if the argument is a string i'd like to add it as a key with a nil value. the below code works, but is there a more appropriate (simple) way?
2nd question, does calling an each method on an array with two arguments |key, val| automatically convert an array to a hash as it appears to?
#some_hash = {}
def some_method(input)
if input.is_a? Hash
input.each {|key, val| #some_hash[key] = val}
else
input.split(" ").each {|key, val| #some_hash[key] = val}
end
end
some_method("key" => "val")
This gives the result as instructed in the question, but it works differently from the code OP gave (which means that the OP's code does not work as it says):
#some_hash = {}
def some_method(input)
case input
when Hash then #some_hash.merge!(input)
when String then #some_hash[input] = nil
end
end
some_method("foo" => "bar")
some_method("baz")
#some_hash # => {"foo" => "bar", "baz" => nil}
Second question
An array is never automatically converted to a hash. What you are probably mentioning is the fact that the elements of an array within an array [[:foo, :bar]] can be referred to separately in:
[[:foo, :bar]].each{|f, b| puts f; puts b}
# => foo
# => bar
That is due to destructive assignment. When necessary, Ruby takes out the elements of an array as separate things and tries to adjust the number of variables. It is the same as:
f, b = [:foo, :bar]
f # => :foo
b # => :bar
Here, you don't get f # => [:foo, :bar] and b # => nil.
This question already has answers here:
How to create a deep copy of an object in Ruby?
(9 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
Im trying to clone a hash, to make a new copy of the original hash but it seems that when I set a value in the new hash, I have the same effect on the original hash.
rr = Hash.new
command = "/usr/local/bin/aws route53 list-resource-record-sets --hosted-zone-id EXAMPLEID --max-items 1"
rr=JSON.parse(%x{#{command}})
puts rr
if rr["ResourceRecordSets"][0]["TTL"] != 60
new_rr = rr.clone
new_rr["ResourceRecordSets"][0]["TTL"] = 60
puts rr
puts new_rr
end
Output:
{"NextRecordType"=>"MX", "NextRecordName"=>"example.com.", "ResourceRecordSets"=>[{"ResourceRecords"=>[{"Value"=>"1.2.3.4"}], "Type"=>"A", "Name"=>"example.com.", "TTL"=>1800}], "MaxItems"=>"1", "IsTruncated"=>true}
{"NextRecordType"=>"MX", "NextRecordName"=>"example.com.", "ResourceRecordSets"=>[{"ResourceRecords"=>[{"Value"=>"1.2.3.4"}], "Type"=>"A", "Name"=>"example.com.", "TTL"=>60}], "MaxItems"=>"1", "IsTruncated"=>true}
{"NextRecordType"=>"MX", "NextRecordName"=>"example.com.", "ResourceRecordSets"=>[{"ResourceRecords"=>[{"Value"=>"1.2.3.4"}], "Type"=>"A", "Name"=>"example.com.", "TTL"=>60}], "MaxItems"=>"1", "IsTruncated"=>true}
I dont see Hash.clone documented in Ruby 2.0, should I be using another method to create a Hash copy now?
Thanks in advance.
Hash is a collection of keys and values, where values are references to objects. When duplicating a hash, new hash is being created, but all object references are being copied, so as result you get new hash containing the same values. That is why this will work:
hash = {1 => 'Some string'} #Strings are mutable
hash2 = hash.clone
hash2[1] #=> 'Some string'
hash2[1].upcase! # modifying mutual object
hash[1] #=> 'SOME STRING; # so it appears modified on both hashes
hash2[1] = 'Other string' # changing reference on second hash to another object
hash[1] #=> 'SOME STRING' # original obejct has not been changed
hash2[2] = 'new value' # adding obejct to original hash
hash[2] #=> nil
If you want duplicate the referenced objects, you need to perform deep duplication. It is added in rails (activesupport gem) as deep_dup method. If you are not using rails and don;t want to install the gem, you can write it like:
class Hash
def deep_dup
Hash[map {|key, value| [key, value.respond_to?(:deep_dup) ? value.deep_dup : begin
value.dup
rescue
value
end]}]
end
end
hash = {1 => 'Some string'} #Strings are mutable
hash2 = hash.deep_dup
hash2[1] #=> 'Some string'
hash2[1].upcase! # modifying referenced object
hash2[1] #=> 'SOME STRING'
hash[1] #=> 'Some string; # now other hash point to original object's clone
You probably should write something similar for arrays. I would also thought about writing it for whole enumerable module, but it might be slightly trickier.
The easiest way to make a deep copy of most Ruby objects (including strings, arrays, hashes and combinations thereof) is to use Marshal:
def deep_copy(obj)
Marshal.load(Marshal.dump(obj))
end
For example,
h = {a: 1, b: [:c, d: {e: 4}]} # => {:a=>1, :b=>[:c, {:d=>{:e=>4}}]}
hclone = h.clone
hdup = h.dup
hmarshal = deep_copy(h)
h[:b][1][:d][:e] = 5
h # => {:a=>1, :b=>[:c, {:d=>{:e=>5}}]}
hclone # => {:a=>1, :b=>[:c, {:d=>{:e=>5}}]}
hdup # => {:a=>1, :b=>[:c, {:d=>{:e=>5}}]}
hmarshal # => {:a=>1, :b=>[:c, {:d=>{:e=>4}}]}
I want to define a method_missing function for one of my classes, and I want to be able to pass in a hash as the argument list instead of an array. Like this:
MyClass::get_by_id {:id => id}
MyClass::get_by_id {:id => id, :filters => filters}
MyClass::get_by_id {:id => id, :filters => filters, :sort => sort}
As far as I can tell, the args list gets passed in as an array, so keys get dropped and there's no way to tell which arguments is which. Is there a way to force Ruby to treat the argument list in method_missing as a hash?
What issue are you having? This works for me:
class MyClass
def self.method_missing name, args
puts args.class
puts args.inspect
end
end
MyClass.foobar :id => 5, :filter => "bar"
# Hash
# {:id=>5, :filter=>"bar"}
Is this what you are looking for ?
class Foo
def self.method_missing(name,*args)
p args
p name
end
end
Foo.bar(1,2,3)
# >> [1, 2, 3]
# >> :bar
I'm answering my own question based on experimentation that I've done since asking. When using a hash splat on the arg list, you can pass in a hash like this:
MyClass::get_by_id(:id => id, :filters => filters)
And the argument list will look like this:
[
{
:id => id,
:filters => filters
}
]
Ruby places the key/value pairs into a single hash object at location args[0]. If you call the method like this:
MyClass::get_by_id(id, :filters => filters)
Your argument list will be this:
[
id,
{:filters => filters}
]
So basically, key/value pairs are merged together into a single hash and passed in order.
Given certain keys, I want to get an array of values from a hash (in the order I gave the keys). I had done this:
class Hash
def values_for_keys(*keys_requested)
result = []
keys_requested.each do |key|
result << self[key]
end
return result
end
end
I modified the Hash class because I do plan to use it almost everywhere in my code.
But I don't really like the idea of modifying a core class. Is there a builtin solution instead? (couldn't find any, so I had to write this).
You should be able to use values_at:
values_at(key, ...) → array
Return an array containing the values associated with the given keys. Also see Hash.select.
h = { "cat" => "feline", "dog" => "canine", "cow" => "bovine" }
h.values_at("cow", "cat") #=> ["bovine", "feline"]
The documentation doesn't specifically say anything about the order of the returned array but:
The example implies that the array will match the key order.
The standard implementation does things in the right order.
There's no other sensible way for the method to behave.
For example:
>> h = { :a => 'a', :b => 'b', :c => 'c' }
=> {:a=>"a", :b=>"b", :c=>"c"}
>> h.values_at(:c, :a)
=> ["c", "a"]
i will suggest you do this:
your_hash.select{|key,value| given_keys.include?(key)}.values
I need a bidirectional Hash table in Ruby. For example:
h = {:abc => 123, :xyz => 789, :qaz => 789, :wsx => [888, 999]}
h.fetch(:xyz) # => 789
h.rfetch(123) # => abc
h.rfetch(789) # => [:xyz, :qaz]
h.rfetch(888) # => :wsx
Method rfetch means reversed fetch and is only my proposal.
Note three things:
If multiple keys map at the same value then rfetch returns all of them, packed in array.
If value is an array then rfetch looks for its param among elements of the array.
Bidirectional Hash means that both fetch and rfetch should execute in constant time.
Does such structure exists in Ruby (including external libraries)?
I thought about implementing it using two one-directional Hashes synchronized when one of them is modified (and packing it into class to avoid synchronization problems) but maybe I could use an already existing solution?
You could build something yourself pretty easily, just use a simple object that wraps two hashes (one for the forward direction, one for the reverse). For example:
class BiHash
def initialize
#forward = Hash.new { |h, k| h[k] = [ ] }
#reverse = Hash.new { |h, k| h[k] = [ ] }
end
def insert(k, v)
#forward[k].push(v)
#reverse[v].push(k)
v
end
def fetch(k)
fetch_from(#forward, k)
end
def rfetch(v)
fetch_from(#reverse, v)
end
protected
def fetch_from(h, k)
return nil if(!h.has_key?(k))
v = h[k]
v.length == 1 ? v.first : v.dup
end
end
Look ups will behave just like normal hash lookups (because they are normal hash lookups). Add some operators and maybe decent to_s and inspect implementations and you're good.
Such a thing works like this:
b = BiHash.new
b.insert(:a, 'a')
b.insert(:a, 'b')
b.insert(:a, 'c')
b.insert(:b, 'a')
b.insert(:c, 'x')
puts b.fetch(:a).inspect # ["a", "b", "c"]
puts b.fetch(:b).inspect # "a"
puts b.rfetch('a').inspect # [:a, :b]
puts b.rfetch('x').inspect # :c
puts b.fetch(:not_there).inspect # nil
puts b.rfetch('not there').inspect # nil
There's nothing wrong with building your tools when you need them.
There is no such structure built-in in Ruby.
Note that Hash#rassoc does something similar, but it returns only the first match and is linear-time:
h = {:abc => 123, :xyz => 789, :qaz => 789, :wsx => [888, 999]}
h.rassoc(123) # => [:abc, 123]
Also, it isn't possible to fullfill your requirements in Ruby in a perfectly safe manner, as you won't be able to detect changes in values that are arrays. E.g.:
h = MyBidirectionalArray.new(:foo => 42, :bar => [:hello, :world])
h.rfetch(:world) # => :bar
h[:bar].shift
h[:bar] # => [:world]
h.rfetch(:world) # => should be nil, but how to detect this??
Computing a hash everytime to detect a change will make your lookup linear-time. You could duplicate the array-values and freeze them, though (like Ruby does for Hash keys that are strings!)
What you seem to need is a Graph class, which could have a different API than a Hash, no? You can check out rgl or similar, but I don't know how they're implemented.
Good luck.
There is a Hash#invert method (http://www.ruby-doc.org/core-2.1.0/Hash.html#method-i-invert) to achieve this. It won't map multiple values to an array though.
Try this:
class Hash
def rfetch val
select { |k,v| v.is_a?(Array) ? v.include?(val) : v == val }.map { |x| x[0] }
end
end
If you're not doing lots of updates to this hash, you might be able to use inverthash.