Im new to Ruby, and im creating a cli app with Thor and some additional gems. My problem is that i take user input (from the console) and pass the data as a variable to a existing method (This method is from a gem)
My method
def search(searchtype, searchterm)
search = OtherClass.new
result = search.search.searchtype keyword: "#{searchterm}"
puts result
# search.search.searchtype is not a method in the gem im using.
end
The OtherClass gem has these search methods: users, repos
The users method
def users(*args)
arguments(args, :required => [:keyword])
get_request("/legacy/user/search/#{escape_uri(keyword)}", arguments.params)
end
The repos method
def repos(*args)
arguments(args, :required => [:keyword])
get_request("/legacy/repos/search/#{escape_uri(keyword)}", arguments.params)
end
So how can i pass in the user data to the method from the OtherClass? Heres something like what i would want to do. The SEARCHTERM would be dynamically passed to the search.search object as a method parameter.
def search(SEARCHTYPE, searchterm)
search = OtherClass.new
result = search.search.SEARCHTYPE keyword: "#{searchterm}"
puts result
end
The "#{searchterm}" works as expected, but i also want to pass in the method to the search.search object dynamically, this could probably be done with if's but im sure theres a better way, maybe the Ruby way to solve this problem.
Finally i would want to be able to use this little program like this (the serch method)
./search.rb search opensource linux
(where opensource could be users, or another type of search, and linux could be the search keyword for the searchtype)
If this is possible i would apprechiate any help!
Thnx!
If you'd like to call a method dynamically, use Object#send.
http://ruby-doc.org/core-1.9.3/Object.html#method-i-send
I would caution against sending a method that was obtained by user input though, for security reasons.
Related
From the book Agile Web Development With Rails
class Order < ActiveRecord::Base
named_scope :last_n_days, lambda { |days| {:conditions =>
['updated < ?' , days] } }
named_scope :checks, :conditions => {:pay_type => :check}
end
The statement
orders = Orders.checks.last_n_days(7)
will result to only one query to the database.
How does rails implement this? I'm new to Ruby and I'm wondering if there's a special construct that allows this to happen.
To be able to chain methods like that, the functions generated by named_scope must be returning themselves or an object than can be scoped further. But how does Ruby know that it is the last function call and that it should query the database now?
I ask this because the statement above actually queries the database and not just returns an SQL statement that results from chaining.
There are two tricks (or patterns if you will) employed in the named_scope magic.
Proxy pattern - calling a named scope method on a class or an association always returns an instance of the ActiveRecord::NamedScope::Scope class, not a colleciton of filtered AR objects. This pattern, altough very useful, makes things kind of blurry sometimes, since the proxy objects are ambivalent in their nature.
Lazy loading - thanks to lazy loading (which in this context means - hitting the database only if neccessary) named scopes can be chained up to the point when you need to work with the collection defined by the scopes. Whenever you request the underlying colleciton, all the chained scopes are evaluated and a database query is executed.
One final note: There's one thing to have in mind when playing with named scopes (or with any thing that uses delegation of some kind) in IRB. Everytime you hit Enter, the thing you wrote beforehand is evaluated and the inspect method is called on the returned value. In the case of chained named scopes, although the whole expression is evaluated to a Scope instance, when the IRB calls the inspect method on it, the scopes are evaluated and the database query is fired. This is caused by the fact that the inspect method is by means of delegation propagated through all the scope objects up to the underlying collection.
You might want to try this
class Order < ActiveRecord::Base
class << self
def last_n_days(n)
scoped(:conditions => ['updated < ?', days])
end
def checks
scoped(:conditions => {:pay_type => :check})
end
end
end
usage is the same
#orders = Order.last_n_days(5)
#orders = Order.checks
#orders = Order.checks.last_n_days(5)
This still does all the lazy loading you love. That is, it won't make a query until you attempt to access the records. Bonus: Rails 3 compatible!
Named Scopes Are Dead
Very cool. I was thinking of doing something like this in Javascript but Javascript behaves rather weird.
The statement:
var x = SomeObject;
does not call SomeObject's toString() function. But the statement:
var x;
x = SomeObject;
correctly calls the toString() function as expected.
This prevents Javascript from doing cool stuff with chaining. =(
I'm using Ruby with Sinatra and DataMapper. It is simple enough to create a "get" webservice that delivers a data set to a UI with something like Item.all().to_json
However, the intent is for the UI to use the data set for crud work and return a single JSON object for add or update. I haven't found an equivalent "from_json" DataMapper function to initialize an Item object.
As a work-around, I'm using JSON.parse, like this:
item_data = JSON.parse(request.body.read, :quirks_mode => true)
This works, but then I have to create a new DataMapper object, i.e. item = Item.new,
and copy all the elements from item_data to item, but I'd like to think there's a simpler way.
Any and all suggestions are welcome.
It seems you have:
class Item
property :body, String
end
So you might want to do this:
class Item
property :body, Json
end
The Json style property, works just like String, the only difference is that on load/store the data will go through the JSON parser.
I had the same problem!
You can create a helper like this:
helpers do
def json_params
begin
JSON.parse(request.body.read)
rescue
halt 400, { message:'Invalid JSON' }.to_json
end
end
end
And create your Datamapper object:
#object = Object.new(json_params)
#object.save
I have this class:
class User
include Mongoid::Document
field :revenues, :type => Integer, :default => nil
attr_accessible :revenues
#now method
def revenues
return 1
end
end
Why in console I get 1 instead nil?
1.9.3-p125 :002 > u.revenues
=> 1
Which has priority, the method or the field? How can I created a method with the same features that a field?
The field macro is defined in Mongoid::Document. It is neither a syntatic feature from Ruby nor from Rails.
What's happening with your code is the following:
The field function creates for you some methods, one of them is called revenues.
When you create another method called revenues, you are in effect overwriting the previously defined method, therefore making it useless.
Short answer: I don't understand a zip about Mongoid, but chances are that your field still exists even after you defined oce again a method named revenues. The only drawback is that you cannot access it by calling myUser.revenues anymore.
Try to make a test: access your field with the notation some_user[:revenues] and see what happen :)
Best regards
we have model helper (used by several different models) called set_guids that sets self.theguid to a random string. Been using it for a long time, we know it works.
in a new model 'Dish' we created, we have
before_create :set_guids (NOTE: no other before/after/validation, just this)
def do_meat_dish
( this is invoked by #somemeat.do_meat_dish in the Dish contoller )
( it manipulated the #somemeat object using self.this and self.that, works fine)
( THEN sometimes it creates a new object of SAME MODEL type )
( which is handled differently)
#veggie = Dish.new
#veggie.do_veggie_dish
end
def do_veggie_dish
recipe_str = "add the XXXX to water"
recipe_str.gsub!("XXXX", self.theguid) *** the PROBLEM: self.theguid is nil
end
as soon as we execute veggie = Dish.new shouldn't veggie.theguid be initialized?
Note we have not saved the new object yet... but the before_create should still have done its thing, right?
it is something to do with create a new instance of a model inside a method for the same model?
is it something with using # for the variables?
Additional note: if we comment out the line trying to access self.theguid everything else works fine ... it's ONLY the value (supposedly) set by the before_create set_guids that is nil instead of being a guid.
before_create is called only before the object is saved to the database the first time. That's why you get nil.
I suggest that you use after_initialize callback instead. Be careful though, since after_initialize will be called whenever the document is new or loaded from the db, that way you will have new guids every time you get the document, which is not what you want. So I suggest you do something like:
def set_guids
return unless theguid.nil?
.....
end
As another solution, if you don't want to change the after_create callback above, you can do something like:
def theguid
super || set_guids
end
That should let you go also.
I have a class, Autodrop, that contains several methods , a.o. 'metadata', that call an external API (dropbox). They are slow.
However, I already often have that metadata around when initializing the AutodropImage, so I should make the methods smarter.
What I have in mind is this:
class Autodrop
include Dropbox
attr_reader :path
def initialize(path)
#path = path
end
def self.from_entry(drop_entry)
#drop_entry = drop_entry
self.initialize(#drop_entry.path)
end
def metadata
if #drop_entry = nil
return heavy_lifting_and_network_traffic
else
return #drop_entry.metadata
end
end
#...
end
Now, I would expect to call
entry = BarEntry.new()
foo = Autodrop.from_entry(entry)
foo.metadata
In order to avoid that heavy lifting and network traffic call.
But this does not work. And somehow, in all my newbieness, I am sure I am goind at this all wrong.
Is there a term I should look for and read about first? How would you go for this?
Note, that the examples are simplified: in my code, I inherit AutodropImage < Autodrop for example, which is called from withing AutodropGallery < Autodrop. The latter already knows all metadata for the AutodropImage, so I mostly want to avoid AutodropImage going over the heavy lifting again.
You are creating an instance variable #drop_entry in your class method from_entry and obviously it wont be available to your object that you are creating in this method. One workaround is to pass it as a parameter when you are initializing the class. It should work if you do the following modifications:
In your from_entry class method change
self.initialize(#drop_entry)
to
new(#drop_entry)
Modify initialize method to:
def initialize(drop_entry)
#drop_entry = drop_entry
#path = #drop_entry.path
end
Or if your class is tied up to pass only the path parameter, ie. you dont want to change the other existing code then you can use an optional parameter drop entry like so
def initialize(path, drop_entry=nil)
You would need to cache the metadata in a class variable.
Edit: Or in a class level instance variable.
Maybe this read will help: http://railstips.org/blog/archives/2006/11/18/class-and-instance-variables-in-ruby/