I was working on coding challenge called Robot name. I also had tests for that. The program passed all the tests. The code is below..
class Robot
attr_accessor :name
##robots = []
def initialize
#name = self.random_name
##robots << self.name
end
def random_name
name = ''
2.times do
name << ('a'..'z').to_a.sample
end
3.times do
name << (1..9).to_a.sample.to_s
end
no_duplicate(name.upcase)
end
def reset
#name = self.random_name
end
def no_duplicate(name)
if ##robots.include? name
reset
else
name
end
end
end
If you need to see the tests file you can look it up here robot_name_tests.
Then I started to refactor and one of the first things was to refactor no_duplicate method. So after refactoring the code looked like this
class Robot
...
# the rest of code stayed the same
def no_duplicate(name)
##robots.include? name ? reset : name
end
end
With this version all tests showed SystemStackError: stack level too deep. Why does it give this error and what is going on behind the scenes in both cases considering the code provided? Thanks!
I like your poetry mode code but it has led you into trouble here.
One way to kinda keep it in poetry mode but fix your operator priority issue is to do this:
def no_duplicate(name)
(##robots.include? name) ? reset : name
end
Update: if you work in Big Corporation With Coding Standards you will need to make it a bit more boring. I thought this was obvious but the gallery is correctly noting the usual solution:
##robots.include?(name) ? reset : name
Related
I have a ruby method
def get_status(creds)
client = create_client(creds)
status = client.account_status
client.close_session
status
end
Usually, I optimize this kind of code by tap or yield_self, but here I can't find a nice way to optimize it.
The only solution I have come up:
def get_status(creds)
create_client(creds).yeild_self do |client|
[client, client.account_status]
end.yield_self do |client, status|
client.close_session
status
end
end
But it doesn't better than the original solution, is it?
One could write the following.
class Client
def account_status
"Overdrawn!"
end
def close_session
puts "It's closed"
end
end
def create_client(creds)
Client.new
end
def get_status(creds)
begin
client = create_client(creds)
client.account_status
ensure
client.close_session if client
end
end
get_status("Anything")
It's closed
#=> "Overdrawn!"
Do I prefer this to #1 in the question? No.
Do I prefer this to #2 in the question? Yes!
Do I prefer this to #max's answer? No.
I understand a finalizer could be created using the class method ObjectSpace::define_finalizer.
class Client
def initialize
ObjectSpace.define_finalizer(self, proc { puts "It's finalized!" })
end
def account_status
"Overdrawn!"
end
end
def create_client(creds)
Client.new
end
def get_status(creds)
create_client(creds).account_status
end
get_status("Anything")
#=> "Overdrawn!"
exit
It's finalized!
One must be careful when creating finalizers, as explained Here. I understand a technique sometimes used is to have finalizer's proc reference class-level objects. See, for example, this article, #Amadan's comments below and #Matt's comments on the question. I am not advocating the use of a finalizer. I merely thought readers unfamiliar with finalizers (as I was before writing this) would find this useful.
Let's list the goal of the function:
Open connection
Read value (and return it)
Close connection
I would consider this a "temporary connection", and that leads me to think it could be refactored to a separate method.
Reasoning: The get_status method is concerned with getting the status from a connection - it doesn't have to handle the details of actually closing/opening the connection itself.
def open_temporary_connection(creds, &block)
client = create_client(creds)
result = block.call(client)
client.close_session
result
end
def get_status(creds)
open_temporary_connection(creds, &:account_status)
end
Also, I should mention, I think yield_self is a bit of a trap. Unless you're dead set on making all of your code into a single expression, it makes the code look awkward without offering a lot of benefit.
I like your first version because it is short, easy to read, and easy to understand. I would not change it.
Nevertheless, an alternative version using tap might look like this:
def get_status(creds)
client = create_client(creds)
client.account_status.tap { client.close_session }
end
I've been looking all around and didn't found any kind of answer to the problem i'm facing in Ruby. I'm writing an app that use core modules sets that are available in different versions. If I'm sourcing a core set version after an another one both code version will be sourced at the same and will clash with each other. That is quite normal and I'm ok with this.
One approach could be to unload the previous version to load the new one but I'd like to keep all the ones loaded into specific namespaces (to avoid time consuming to unload/reload code all the time). 2 possible solutions to me (or maybe other)
Either source the code then move it into a version namespace (some clues to do it see below but doesn't work yet)
Or source the code directly into a version namespace (don't know how to do it exactly, maybe with module_eval but need to recode the require process with dependencies). Does any solution seems possible ?
Here is a very simple poc of what I'm trying to achieve
file : coreset_1.0.0.rb
module CoreA
def self.who_am_i?; self.to_s; end
def self.get_coreb; CoreB end
end
module CoreB
def self.who_am_i?; self.to_s; end
end
file : coreset_2.0.0.rb (got some changes)
module CoreA
def self.my_name; self.to_s; end
def self.get_coreb; CoreB end
end
module CoreB
def self.my_name; self.to_s; end
end
file : coreManager.rb
module CoreManager
def self.load_version(arg_version)
#Create a module set for the selected version
core_set_name = CoreSet + '_' + arg_version.gsub('.', '_')
core_set = eval("Module #{core_set_name}; end; #{core_set_name}"
#Load the requested code
require "coreset_#{arg_version}.rb"
#Move loaded code into it core set module
core_set.const_set(:CoreA, Object.send(:remove_const, :CoreA))
core_set.const_set(:CoreB, Object.send(:remove_const,:CoreB))
#Return the created core set
core_set
end
end
If running the code :
require 'coreManager.rb'
core_set = CoreManager.load_version("1.0.0")
puts core_set::CoreA.who_am_i?
puts core_set::CoreA.get_coreB
it returns :
CoreA #not CoreSet_1_0_0::CoreA
uninitialized constant CoreA::CoreB (NameError)
If running something statically defined, it works
module CoreSet
module CoreA
def self.who_am_i?; self.to_s; end
def self.get_coreb; CoreB end
end
module CoreB
def self.who_am_i?; self.to_s; end
end
end
CoreSet::CoreA.get_coreb
It returns as expected :
CoreSet::CoreB
Depite of what is usually said :"a module is a constant", it seems to be more than that. What are the differencies and how to make the dynamic version working ?
Any other ideas ?
Thanks for your help folks :)
There are several things broken in your code (which is ok for POC, I guess), but the main one is that require loads constants and globals into the global namespace.
So, your Core<X> modules are not namespaced this way, as you might expect. There is Kernel#load method that allows "wrapped" execution of the loaded file, but it's wrapped into an anonymous module, so you can prevent the global namespace from being polluted, but you cannot "target" the constants to be defined into a particular namespace this way.
What you could try is to load the code as text and then eval it within the dynamically created module, matching your version. For example, look at this quick and very dirty sketch (coreset_...rb files are expected to sit into coresets directory):
module CoreSet; end
class CoreManager
class << self
def load_version(ver)
raise "Vesion #{ver} unknown" unless exists?(ver)
file = filename(ver)
code = File.read(file)
versioned_wrapper = Module.new do
class_eval code
end
CoreSet.const_set("V_#{ver.gsub('.', '_')}", versioned_wrapper)
end
private
def exists?(ver)
File.exists? filename(ver)
end
def filename(ver)
"coresets/coreset_#{ver.gsub('.', '_')}.rb"
end
end
end
CoreManager.load_version("1.0.0")
CoreManager.load_version("2.0.0")
p CoreSet::V_1_0_0::CoreA.who_am_i? # => "CoreSet::V_1_0_0::CoreA"
p CoreSet::V_1_0_0::CoreA.get_coreb # => CoreSet::V_1_0_0::CoreB
p CoreSet::V_2_0_0::CoreA.my_name # => "CoreSet::V_2_0_0::CoreA"
p CoreSet::V_2_0_0::CoreA.get_coreb # => CoreSet::V_2_0_0::CoreB
But, DON'T do this at home, please :) At least, I would think twice.
If all you need is to have all the versions loaded at once (you need namespaces exactly for this, right?) what stops you from defining them statically, like CoreSet::V1::Core<X> etc and use the idiomatic and safe ways to (auto)load them? :) Playing with dynamic nested constants definition (and, especially, their removing) is one of the easiest ways to shoot your own foot...
Ok I finally came to a solution that may help others or that can be discussed.
Getting the error uninitialized constant CoreA::CoreB (NameError) leads me to take the problem under a new angle. If I'm not able to access to CoreB module from CoreA (because the module nesting has been broken when redefining module constants into the CoreSet module) then why not referencing in each core module the other ones in the set ? And finaly it works without any dirty hack, I'm just creating pointers and the Ruby Core find it natively ;)
module CoreManager
def self.load_version(arg_version)
#Create a module set for the selected version
core_set_name = CoreSet + '_' + arg_version.gsub('.', '_')
core_set = eval("Module #{core_set_name}; end; #{core_set_name}"
#Load the requested code
toplevel_consts = Object.constants
require "coreset_#{arg_version}.rb"
core_modules = Object.constants - toplevel_consts
#Move the core modules to the set namespace
core_modules.collect! do |core_module|
core_module_sym = core_module.to_s.to_sym
core_set.const_set(core_module_sym, Object.send(:remove_const, core_module_sym))
eval("#{core_set}::#{core_module}")
end
#Create connexion between set cores to skirt broken module nesting
core_modules.each do |current_core|
core_modules.each do |other_core|
current_core.const_set(other_core.to_s.to_sym, other_core) unless current_core == other_core
end
end
#Return the created core set
core_set
end
end
This simple method on a class just run the status method using the safe navigation operator.
def current_status
account&.status
end
But reek report this warning:
MyClass#current_status performs a nil-check [https://github.com/troessner/reek/blob/master/docs/Nil-Check.md]
How can I properly write methods like this to avoid Nil Check?
I've also verified this post from thoughtbot but it seem like "too much" for just a safe navigation operator.
Ruby 2.3.1
The advice from "Example 4" in the linked post is verbose but pretty good :
class MyClass
def initialize(with_account = nil)
#account = Account.new if with_account
end
def current_status
account.status
end
def account
#account || NilAccount.new
end
end
class Account
def status
"Up!"
end
end
class NilAccount
def status
"Down!"
end
end
puts MyClass.new(:with_account).current_status
#=> "Up!"
puts MyClass.new.current_status
#=> "Down!"
If it's "too much" for you, account&.status might be just fine.
Whatever you do : you'll need to test your code as much as possible!
well, tell-dont-ask looks pretty good, but Example 4 looks like an overkill to resolve this specific case.
#andredurao I think, we can use this workaround to pass checks, for some reason reek is fine with it:
def current_status
return unless account
account.status
end
Let me preface by stating I'm a "new" programmer - an IT guy trying his hand at his first "real" problem after working through various tutorials.
So - here is what I'm trying to do. I'm watching a directory for a .csv file - it will be in this format: 999999_888_filename.csv
I want to return each part of the "_" filename as a variable to pass on to another program/script for some other task. I have come up w/ the following code:
require 'rubygems'
require 'fssm'
class Watcher
def start
monitor = FSSM::Monitor.new(:directories => true)
monitor.path('/data/testing/uploads') do |path|
path.update do |base, relative, ftype|
output(relative)
end
path.create do |base, relative, ftype|
output(relative)
end
path.delete { |base, relative, ftype| puts "DELETED #{relative} (#{ftype})" }
end
monitor.run
end
def output(relative)
puts "#{relative} added"
values = relative.split('_',)
sitenum = values[0]
numrecs = values[1]
filename = values[2]
puts sitenum
end
end
My first "puts" gives me the full filename (it's just there to show me the script is working), and the second puts returns the 'sitenum'. I want to be able to access this "outside" of this output method. I have this file (named watcher.rb) in a libs/ folder and I have a second file in the project root called 'monitor.rb' which contains simply:
require './lib/watcher'
watcher = Watcher.new
watcher.start
And I can't figure out how to access my 'sitenum', 'numrecs' and 'filename' from this file. I'm not sure if it needs to be a variable, instance variable or what. I've played around w/ attr_accessible and other things, and nothing works. I decided to ask here since I've been spinning my wheels for a couple of things, and I'm starting to confuse myself by searching on my own.
Thanks in advance for any help or advice you may have.
At the top of the Watcher class, you're going to want to define three attr_accessor declarations, which give the behavior you want. (attr_reader if you're only reading, attr_writer if you're only writing, attr_accessor if both.)
class Watcher
attr_accessor :sitenum, :numrecs, :filename
...
# later on, use # for class variables
...
#sitenum = 5
...
end
Now you should have no problem with watcher.sitenum etc. Here's an example.
EDIT: Some typos.
In addition to Jordan Scales' answer, these variable should initialized
class Watcher
attr_accessor :sitenum, :numrecs, :filename
def initialize
#sitenum = 'default value'
#numrecs = 'default value'
#filename = 'default value'
end
...
end
Otherwise you'll get uninformative value nil
I want to eliminate "=" sign for a particular reason. It might looks like this:
cat_that_has_name("Kelly").as(:kelly)
kelly.do_something
The "as" method here is used to generate a method "kelly" that reference my cat. Could anyone help me with this?
Any suggestions will be appreciated.
Update:
Jorg was right, I've add a simple test to demonstrate my intention:
require "test/unit"
class AsTest < Test::Unit::TestCase
def setup
#cats = ["Kelly", "Tommy"]
end
def teardown
end
def test_as
kelly1 = get_cat("Kelly")
get_cat("Kelly").as(:kelly2)
assert_equal(kelly1.object_id, kelly2.object_id)
end
private
def get_cat(name)
#cats.each do |cat|
if cat.to_s==name
return cat
end
end
return nil
end
end
It's kind of hard to figure out what you actually want. If you want some sensible answers, you will have to provide a complete code example of what you want to achieve (for example, the code you posted is missing definitions for the cat_that_has_name and so_something methods). You will also need to post a complete specification of what exactly you expect the as method to do, with usage examples and ideally also with a testsuite. After all, how do we know if our answer is correct if you haven't defined what "correct" means?
The best I could decipher from your cryptic question is something like this:
class Object
def as(name)
s = self
Object.send(:define_method, name) { s }
Object.send(:private, name)
end
end
But there is no way of knowing whether this works, because if I try to run your code example, I get a NoMethodError for cat_that_has_name and another NoMethodError for so_something.
Note also that your question is self-inconsistent: in your subject line you ask about a method to replace = (i.e. creating variables) but in your question you talk about creating methods, which would mean that you are looking for a replacement for def and not for =. Again, it would be much easier to answer correctly if there were a testsuite.