Is there a straightforward way to do something like the following without excessive looping?
myArray = [["a","b"],["c","d"],["e","f"]]
if myArray.includes?("c")
...
I know this works fine if it's just a normal array of chars... but I would like something equally as elegant for an array of an array of chars (bonus points for helping convert this to an array of tuples).
If you only need a true/false answer you can flatten the array and call include on that:
>> myArray.flatten.include?("c")
=> true
You can use assoc:
my_array = [['a', 'b'], ['c', 'd'], ['e', 'f']]
if my_array.assoc('c')
# ...
It actually returns the whole subarray:
my_array.assoc('c') #=> ["c", "d"]
or nil if there is no match:
my_array.assoc('g') #=> nil
There's also rassoc to search for the second element:
my_array.rassoc('d') #=> ["c", "d"]
my_array = [["a","b"],["c","d"],["e","f"]]
p my_hash = my_array.to_h # => {"a"=>"b", "c"=>"d", "e"=>"f"}
p my_hash.key?("c") # => true
You can use Array#any?
myArray = [["a","b"],["c","d"],["e","f"]]
if myArray.any? { |x| x.includes?("c") }
# some code here
The find_index method works well for this:
myArray = [["a","b"],["c","d"],["e","f"]]
puts "found!" if myArray.find_index {|a| a[0] == "c" }
The return value is the array index of the pair or nil if the pair is not found.
You can capture the pair's value (or nil if not found) this way:
myArray.find_index {|a| a[0] == "c" } || [nil, nil])[1]
# => "d"
Related
I'm trying to create this huge hash, where there are many keys but only a few values.
So far I have it like so...
du_factor = {
"A" => 1,
"B" => 1,
"C" => 1,
"D" => 2,
"E" => 2,
"F" => 2,
...etc., etc., etc., on and on and on for longer than you even want to know. What's a shorter and more elegant way of creating this hash without flipping its structure entirely?
Edit: Hey so, I realized there was a waaaay easier and more elegant way to do this than the answers given. Just declare an empty hash, then declare some arrays with the keys you want, then use a for statement to insert them into the array, like so:
du1 = ["A", "B", "C"]
du2 = ["D", "E", "F"]
dufactor = {}
for i in du1
dufactor[i] = 1
end
for i in du740
dufactor[i] = 2
end
...but the fact that nobody suggested that makes me, the extreme Ruby n00b, think that there must be a reason why I shouldn't do it this way. Performance issues?
Combining Ranges with a case block might be another option (depending on the problem you are trying to solve):
case foo
when ('A'..'C') then 1
when ('D'..'E') then 2
# ...
end
Especially if you focus on your source code's readability.
How about:
vals_to_keys = {
1 => [*'A'..'C'],
2 => [*'D'..'F'],
3 => [*'G'..'L'],
4 => ['dog', 'cat', 'pig'],
5 => [1,2,3,4]
}
vals_to_keys.each_with_object({}) { |(v,arr),h| arr.each { |k| h[k] = v } }
#=> {"A"=>1, "B"=>1, "C"=>1, "D"=>2, "E"=>2, "F"=>2, "G"=>3, "H"=>3, "I"=>3,
# "J"=>3, "K"=>3, "L"=>3, "dog"=>4, "cat"=>4, "pig"=>4, 1=>5, 2=>5, 3=>5, 4=>5}
What about something like this:
du_factor = Hash.new
["A", "B", "C"].each {|ltr| du_factor[ltr] = 1}
["D", "E", "F"].each {|ltr| du_factor[ltr] = 2}
# Result:
du_factor # => {"A"=>1, "B"=>1, "C"=>1, "D"=>2, "E"=>2, "F"=>2}
Create an empty hash, then for each group of keys that share a value, create an array literal containing the keys, and use the array's '.each' method to batch enter them into the hash. Basically the same thing you did above with for loops, but it gets it done in three lines.
keys = %w(A B C D E F)
values = [1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2]
du_factor = Hash[*[keys, values].transpose.flatten]
If these will be more than 100, writing them down to a CSV file might be better.
keys = [%w(A B C), %w(D E F)]
values = [1,2]
values.map!.with_index{ |value, idx| Array(value) * keys[idx].size }.flatten!
keys.flatten!
du_factor = Hash[keys.zip(values)]
Notice here that I used destructive methods (methods ending with !). this is important for performance and memory usage optimization.
def compute(ary)
return nil unless ary
ary.map { |a, b| !b.nil? ? a + b : a }
end
compute([1,2],[3,4])
Can someone please explain to me how compute adds the inner array's values?
To me it seems that calling map on that array of arrays would add the two arrays together, not the inner elements of each array.
map basically iterates over the elements of the object:
foo = [
['a', 'b'],
['c', 'd']
]
foo.map{ |ary| puts ary.join(',') }
# >> a,b
# >> c,d
In this example it's passing each sub-array, which is assigned to ary.
Looking at it a bit differently:
foo.map{ |ary| puts "ary is a #{ary.class}" }
# >> ary is a Array
# >> ary is a Array
Because Ruby lets us assign multiple values at once, that could have been written:
foo.map{ |item1, item2| puts "item1: #{ item1 }, item2: #{ item2 }" }
# >> item1: a, item2: b
# >> item1: c, item2: d
If map is iterating over an array of hashes, each iteration yields a sub-hash to the block:
foo = [
{'a' => 1},
{'b' => 2}
]
foo.map{ |elem| puts "elem is a #{ elem.class }" }
# >> elem is a Hash
# >> elem is a Hash
If map is iterating over a hash, each iteration yields the key/value pair to the block:
foo = {
'a' => 1,
'b' => 2
}
foo.map{ |k, v| puts "k: #{k}, v: #{v}" }
# >> k: a, v: 1
# >> k: b, v: 2
However, if you only give the block a single parameter, Ruby will assign both the key and value to the variable so you'll see it as an array:
foo.map{ |ary| puts "ary is a #{ary.class}" }
# >> ary is a Array
# >> ary is a Array
So, you have to be aware of multiple things that are happening as you iterate over the container, and as Ruby passes the values into map's block.
Beyond all that, it's important to remember that map is going to return a value, or values, for each thing passed in. map, AKA collect, is used to transform the values. It shouldn't be used as a replacement for each, which only iterates. In all the examples above I didn't really show map used correctly because I was trying to show what happens to the elements passed in. Typically we'd do something like:
foo = [['a', 'b'], ['c', 'd']]
foo.map{ |ary| ary.join(',') }
# => ["a,b", "c,d"]
Or:
bar = [[1,2], [3,4]]
bar.collect{ |i, j| i * j }
# => [2, 12]
There's also map! which changes the object being iterated, rather than returns the values. I'd recommend avoiding map! until you're well aware of why it'd be useful to you, because it seems to confuse people no end unless they understand how variables are passed and how Arrays and Hashes work.
The best thing is to play with map in IRB. You'll be able to see what's happening more easily.
I think I figured this out myself.
map selects the first array of the array-of-arrays and pipes it into the block. The variables a and b therefore refer to the first array's inner elements, rather than the first array and the second array in the array-of-arrays.
I have an array arr. I want to destructively remove elements from arr based on a condition, returning the removed elements.
arr = [1,2,3]
arr.some_method{|a| a > 1} #=> [2, 3]
arr #=> [1]
My first try was reject!:
arr = [1,2,3]
arr.reject!{|a| a > 1}
but the returning blocks and arr's value are both [1].
I could write a custom function, but I think there is an explicit method for this. What would that be?
Update after the question was answered:
partition method turns out to be useful for implementing this behavior for hash as well. How can I remove elements of a hash, returning the removed elements and the modified hash?
hash = {:x => 1, :y => 2, :z => 3}
comp_hash, hash = hash.partition{|k,v| v > 1}.map{|a| Hash[a]}
comp_hash #=> {:y=>2, :z=>3}
hash #=> {:x=>1}
I'd use partition here. It doesn't modify self inplace, but returns two new arrays. By assigning the second array to arr again, it gets the results you want:
comp_arr, arr = arr.partition { |a| a > 1 }
See the documentation of partition.
All methods with a trailing bang ! modify the receiver and it seems to be a convention that these methods return the resulting object because the non-bang do so.
What you can to do though is something like this:
b = (arr.dup - arr.reject!{|a| a>1 })
b # => [2,3]
arr #=> [1]
Here is a link to a ruby styleguide which has a section on nameing - although its rather short
To remove (in place) elements of array returning the removed elements one could use delete method, as per Array class documentation:
a = [ "a", "b", "b", "b", "c" ]
a.delete("b") #=> "b"
a #=> ["a", "c"]
a.delete("z") #=> nil
a.delete("z") { "not found" } #=> "not found"
It accepts block so custom behavior could be added, as needed
I have an array of strings, and want to make a hash out of it. Each element of the array will be the key, and I want to make the value being computed from that key. Is there a Ruby way of doing this?
For example:
['a','b'] to convert to {'a'=>'A','b'=>'B'}
You can:
a = ['a', 'b']
Hash[a.map {|v| [v,v.upcase]}]
%w{a b c}.reduce({}){|a,v| a[v] = v.upcase; a}
Ruby's each_with_object method is a neat way of doing what you want
['a', 'b'].each_with_object({}) { |k, h| h[k] = k.upcase }
Here's another way:
a.zip(a.map(&:upcase)).to_h
#=>{"a"=>"A", "b"=>"B"}
Which ever way you look at it you will need to iterate the initial array. Here's another way :
a = ['a', 'b', 'c']
h = Hash[a.collect {|v| [v, v.upcase]}]
#=> {"a"=>"A", "b"=>"B", "c"=>"C"}
Here's a naive and simple solution that converts the current character to a symbol to be used as the key. And just for fun it capitalizes the value. :)
h = Hash.new
['a', 'b'].each {|a| h[a.to_sym] = a.upcase}
puts h
# => {:a=>"A", :b=>"B"}
From Rails 6.x, you can use Enumerable#index_with:
irb(main):002:0> ['a', 'b'].index_with {|s| s.upcase}
=> {"a"=>"A", "b"=>"B"}
Pass a block to .to_h
[ 'a', 'b' ].to_h{ |element| [ element, element.upcase ] }
#=> {"a"=>"A", "b"=>"B"}
Thanks to #SMAG for the refactor suggestion!
Not sure if this is the real Ruby way but should be close enough:
hash = {}
['a', 'b'].each do |x|
hash[x] = x.upcase
end
p hash # prints {"a"=>"A", "b"=>"B"}
As a function we would have this:
def theFunk(array)
hash = {}
array.each do |x|
hash[x] = x.upcase
end
hash
end
p theFunk ['a', 'b', 'c'] # prints {"a"=>"A", "b"=>"B", "c"=>"C"}
In Perl to perform a hash update based on arrays of keys and values I can do something like:
#hash{'key1','key2','key3'} = ('val1','val2','val3');
In Ruby I could do something similar in a more complicated way:
hash.merge!(Hash[ *[['key1','key2','key3'],['val1','val2','val3']].transpose ])
OK but I doubt the effectivity of such procedure.
Now I would like to do a more complex assignment in a single line.
Perl example:
(#hash{'key1','key2','key3'}, $key4) = &some_function();
I have no idea if such a thing is possible in some simple Ruby way. Any hints?
For the Perl impaired, #hash{'key1','key2','key3'} = ('a', 'b', 'c') is a hash slice and is a shorthand for something like this:
$hash{'key1'} = 'a';
$hash{'key2'} = 'b';
$hash{'key3'} = 'c';
In Ruby 1.9 Hash.[] can take as its argument an array of two-valued arrays (in addition to the old behavior of a flat list of alternative key/value arguments). So it's relatively simple to do:
mash.merge!( Hash[ keys.zip(values) ] )
I do not know perl, so I'm not sure what your final "more complex assignment" is trying to do. Can you explain in words—or with the sample input and output—what you are trying to achieve?
Edit: based on the discussion in #fl00r's answer, you can do this:
def f(n)
# return n arguments
(1..n).to_a
end
h = {}
keys = [:a,:b,:c]
*vals, last = f(4)
h.merge!( Hash[ keys.zip(vals) ] )
p vals, last, h
#=> [1, 2, 3]
#=> 4
#=> {:a=>1, :b=>2, :c=>3}
The code *a, b = some_array will assign the last element to b and create a as an array of the other values. This syntax requires Ruby 1.9. If you require 1.8 compatibility, you can do:
vals = f(4)
last = vals.pop
h.merge!( Hash[ *keys.zip(vals).flatten ] )
You could redefine []= to support this:
class Hash
def []=(*args)
*keys, vals = args # if this doesn't work in your version of ruby, use "keys, vals = args[0...-1], args.last"
merge! Hash[keys.zip(vals.respond_to?(:each) ? vals : [vals])]
end
end
Now use
myhash[:key1, :key2, :key3] = :val1, :val2, :val3
# or
myhash[:key1, :key2, :key3] = some_method_returning_three_values
# or even
*myhash[:key1, :key2, :key3], local_var = some_method_returning_four_values
you can do this
def some_method
# some code that return this:
[{:key1 => 1, :key2 => 2, :key3 => 3}, 145]
end
hash, key = some_method
puts hash
#=> {:key1 => 1, :key2 => 2, :key3 => 3}
puts key
#=> 145
UPD
In Ruby you can do "parallel assignment", but you can't use hashes like you do in Perl (hash{:a, :b, :c)). But you can try this:
hash[:key1], hash[:key2], hash[:key3], key4 = some_method
where some_method returns an Array with 4 elements.