I'm new to programming and trying to make sense of why an operator almost always use for addition, appends a hash key-value pair in Ruby.
The following code snippet is from the Pragmatic Studio Ruby course:
letters = {"c" => 3, "e" => 1, "l" => 1, "n" => 1, "t" => 1, "x" => 8, "y" => 4}
point_totals = Hash.new(0)
"excellently".each_char do |char|
point_totals[char] += letters[char]
end
puts point_totals
puts point_totals.values.reduce(0, :+)
Output
{"e"=>3, "x"=>8, "c"=>3, "l"=>3, "n"=>1, "t"=>1, "y"=>4}
23
Why does the language use += instead of <<?
You have += because you are adding the value of letters[char] to points_total[char]
<< is used for appending to an array.
You're not appending a key-value pair, you're incrementing the value associated with the char key in the points_total hash.
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.
I'm trying to increment all values of a hash by a given amount and return the hash. I am expecting:
add_to_value({"a" => 1, "c" => 2,"b"=> 3}, 1)
# => {"a" => 2, "c" => 3,"b"=> 4}
I'm thinking:
def add_to_value(hash, x)
hash.each {|key,value| value + x}
end
This returns:
{"a"=>1, "b"=>3, "c"=>2}
Why is hash sorted alphabetically?
You're super close, without any extra gems needed:
def add_to_value(hash, x)
hash.each {|key,value| hash[key] += x }
end
Just iterate the hash and update each value-by-key. #each returns the object being iterated on, so the result will be the original hash, which has been modified in place.
If you want a copy of the original hash, you can do that pretty easily, too:
def add_to_value(hash, x)
hash.each.with_object({}) {|(key, value), out| out[key] = value + x }
end
That'll define a new empty hash, pass it to the block, where it collects the new values. The new hash is returned from #with_object, and is thus returned out of add_to_value.
You can do the following to increment values:
hash = {}
{"a" => 1, "c" => 2,"b"=> 3}.each {|k,v| hash[k]=v+1}
hash
=>{"a"=>2, "c"=>3, "b"=>4}
And the hash will be sorted as you want.
The problem becomes trivial if you use certain gems, such as y_support. Type in your command line gem install y_support, and enjoy the extended hash iterators:
require 'y_support/core_ext/hash'
h = { "a"=>1, "c"=>3, "b"=>2 }
h.with_values do |v| v + 1 end
#=> {"a"=>2, "c"=>4, "b"=>3}
As for your sorting problem, I was unable to reproduce it.
Of course, a less elegant solution is possible without installing a gem:
h.each_with_object Hash.new do |(k, v), h| h[k] = v + 1 end
The gem also gives you Hash#with_keys (which modifies keys) and Hash#modify (which modifies both keys and values, kind of mapping from hash to hash), and banged versions Hash#with_values!, #with_keys! that modify the hash in place.
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
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.
Example for array
arr = ["a", "b", "c"]
# TODO create an alias for arr[1] as x
x = "X"
# arr should be ["a", "X", "c"] here
Example for hash
hash = { :a => "aaa", :b => "bbb" , :c => "ccc" }
# TODO create an alias for hash[:b] as y
y = "YYY"
# hash should be { :a => "aaa", :b => "YYY" , :c => "ccc" } here
And also an alias for a variable?
var = 5
# TODO create an alias for var as z
z = 7
# var should be 7 here
Motivation: I have a big large deep construct of data, and you can imagine the rest. I want to use it in a read-only manner, but due to performance reasons copy is not permissible.
Metaphor: I want to choose context from a larger data structure and I want to access it with a short and simple name.
UPDATE: Problem solved as sepp2k advised. I just want to draw a summarizing picture here about the solution.
irb(main):001:0> arr = [ { "a" => 1, "b" => 2}, { "x" => 7, "y" => 8 } ]
=> [{"a"=>1, "b"=>2}, {"x"=>7, "y"=>8}]
irb(main):002:0> i = arr[0]
=> {"a"=>1, "b"=>2}
irb(main):004:0> j = arr[1]
=> {"x"=>7, "y"=>8}
irb(main):007:0> j["z"] = 9
=> 9
irb(main):008:0> j
=> {"x"=>7, "y"=>8, "z"=>9}
irb(main):009:0> arr
=> [{"a"=>1, "b"=>2}, {"x"=>7, "y"=>8, "z"=>9}]
What you want is not possible. There is no feature in ruby that you could use to make your examples work like you want.
However since you're saying you want to only use it read-only, there is no need for that. You can just do x = myNestedStructure[foo][bar][baz]. There will be no copying involved when you do that. Assignment does not copy the assigned object in ruby.
You would have to create a method that is your alias, which would update the data.
def y=(value)
arr[:b]=value
end
Then call it.
self.y="foo"
Edit: updated second code snippet.