How does following code works and, more importantly, why does it work that way?
class Example
def one
def one
#value = 99
end
puts "Expensive Call"
#value = 99 # assume its expensive call
end
end
ex = Example.new
puts ex.one # => "Expensive Call"; 99
puts ex.one # => 99
Here, on first call to method one, Ruby executes the outer one method, but on successive calls, it executes only the inner one method, bypassing the outer one method totally.
I want to know how does it happen and why does it happen so.
How It Works
Ruby allows you to redefine classes at run-time, because class and def are actually executable code. In your example, the code does the following:
Defines an Example#one method that will (re)define the Example#one method when the instance method is called.
For practical purposes, the inner def will not be executed until the outer instance method is called. (Hair-splitters may legitimately argue this definition, but that gets into details of the parser/interpreter that just don't matter for the purposes of this discussion.)
You define an instance of Example named "ex."
You invoke the instance method on ex, which defines a new method with the same name.
When you call the instance method again, the new method is used instead of the old one.
Why It Works
Basically, the last definition of a method replaces any earlier definitions in that namespace, but the methods are actually new objects. You can see this in action as follows:
def my_method
puts 'Old Method'
puts self.method(:my_method).object_id
def my_method
puts 'New Method'
puts self.method(:my_method).object_id
end
end
If you run this in an irb or pry session, you can see the method redefined at run-time:
> my_method; puts; my_method
Old Method
8998420
New Method
8998360
As you can see by the different object IDs, even though the methods have the same name and are attached to the same object (generally main at the console), they are actually different method objects. However, since the methods were defined with the same name, only the most recent definition is found when the instance does a method lookup.
When you execute it the first time, it redefines itself in the class and then finishes. The second time, the method one has been overriden by itself to just #value = 99, so nothing is printed.
It's important to realize first that there is no such thing as inner or outer methods in Ruby.
You're defining a new method within a method—in this case, since the method being defined has the same name as an existing one, the new definition completely overwrites the original one.
What you have is equivalent to the (perhaps) more obvious:
class Example
def one
self.class.send(:define_method, :one) do
#value = 99
end
puts "Expensive Call"
#value = 99 # assume its expensive call
end
end
Here it's clearer that you're defining a method within the context of the class.
Related
Main Question: In the Ruby API docs for the module_function method, I see the following code example:
module Mod
def one
"This is one"
end
module_function :one
end
class Cls
include Mod
def call_one
one
end
end
Mod.one #=> "This is one"
c = Cls.new
c.call_one #=> "This is one"
module Mod
def one
"This is the new one"
end
end
Mod.one #=> "This is one"
c.call_one #=> "This is the new one"
If I'm reading this code right, I see the following:
A module is defined named Mod, along with a method named one. The module_function method is then called, passing the name of this method as the param.
A class is defined named Cls, and the Mod module is included in this class, giving the class access to the method defined inside Mod. Then a wrapper method is created, which just delegates its call to the module method.
The module method is called directly, and the wrapper method is called on a new instance of the class. Both calls return the same thing.
After that point is where I get confused. The module is then re-opened and a new implementation of the one method is created. Then the two original method calls (the module call and the class instance call) are performed again, this time with different outputs.
If two different outputs are being displayed from the respective method calls, this implies that there must now be two different methods with the same name in the module. Am I correct about that?
Related Question: out of curiosity, I tried the following code, but it didn't produce the same results:
module Sprocket
def create
"Sprocket"
end
module_function
def create
"Sprocket 2.0"
end
end
class SprocketFactory
include Sprocket
def make
create
end
end
p Sprocket.create #=> "Sprocket 2.0"
p SprocketFactory.new.make #=> "Sprocket 2.0"
Therefore, what would the API example code look like if the two one methods had been defined at the same time (instead of re-opening the module, as was done in the docs)? Or is such a thing not possible?
what would the API example code look like if the two one methods had been defined at the same time
module Sprocket
def create
"Sprocket"
end
module_function :create
def create
"Sprocket 2.0"
end
end
You should imagine a timeline that is not revertable.
The first example (with ones): introduces an instance method one, declares it to be a module method, introduces new instance method one. The module method remains unchanged.
Your code with create: introduces an instance method create, introduces new “dual” scope for everything declared below with module_function, both introduces new module method and redeclares the instance method.
The code above: introduces an instance method, declares it to be a module method, introduces new instance method.
Is there a way to bind an existing method to an existing instance of an object if both the method and the instance are passed as symbols into a method that does that if the instance is not a symbol?
For example:
def some_method
#do something
end
some_instance = Klass.new(something)
def method_that_binds(:some_method, to: :some_instance)
#how do I do that?
end
Your requirements are a little unusual, but it is possible to do this mostly as you say:
class Person; end
harry = Person.new
barry = Person.new
def test
puts 'It works!'
end
define_method :method_that_binds do |a_method, to|
eval(to[:to].to_s).singleton_class.send(:define_method, a_method, &Object.new.method(a_method))
end
method_that_binds :test, to: :harry
harry.test
# It works! will be sent to STDOUT
barry.test
# undefined method 'test'
This doesn't actually use a named parameter, but accepts a hash with a to key, but you can see you can call it in the way you want. It also assumes that the methods you are defining are defined globally on Object.
The API you want doesn't easily work, because you have to know from which scope you want to access the local variable. It's not quite clear to me why you want to pass the name of the local variable instead of passing the content of the local variable … after all, the local variable is present at the call site.
Anyway, if you pass in the scope in addition to the name, this can be accomplished rather easily:
def some_method(*args)
puts args
puts "I can access some_instance's ivar: ##private_instance_var"
end
class Foo; def initialize; #private_instance_var = :foo end end
some_instance = Foo.new
def method_that_binds(meth, to:, within:, with: [])
self.class.instance_method(meth).bind(within.local_variable_get(to)).(*with)
end
method_that_binds(:some_method, to: :some_instance, within: binding, with: ['arg1', 'arg2'])
# arg1
# arg2
# I can access some_instance's ivar: foo
As you can see, I also added a way to pass arguments to the method. Without that extension, it becomes even simpler:
def method_that_binds(meth, to:, within:)
self.class.instance_method(meth).bind(within.local_variable_get(to)).()
end
But you have to pass the scope (Binding) into the method.
If you'd like to add a method just to some_instance i.e. it's not available on other instances of Klass then this can be done using define_singleton_method (documentation here.)
some_instance.define_singleton_method(:some_method, method(:some_method))
Here the first use of the symbol :some_method is the name you'd like the method to have on some_instance and the second use as a parameter to method is creating a Method object from your existing method.
If you'd like to use the same name as the existing method you could wrap this in your own method like:
def add_method(obj, name)
obj.define_singleton_method(name, method(name))
end
Let's say we have a class A with a method a and a local variable c.
class A
def a; 10 end
end
c = '5'
And we want to add the method A#a to c.
This is how it can be done
c.singleton_class.send :define_method, :b, &A.new.method(:a)
p c.b # => 10
Explanations.
One way to add a method to an object instance and not to its class is to define it in its singleton class (which every ruby object has).
We can get the c's singleton class by calling the corresponding method c.signleton_class.
Next we need to dynamically define a method in its class and this can usually be accomplished by using the define_method which takes a method name as its first argument (in our case :b) and a block. Now, converting the method into a block might look a bit tricky but the idea is relatively simple: we first transform the method into a Method instance by calling the Object#method and then by putting the & before A.new.method(:a) we tell the interpreter to call the to_proc method on our object (as our returned object is an instance of the Method, the Method#to_proc will be called) and after that the returned proc will be translated into a block that the define_method expects as its second argument.
In the following example everything is logical for me:
class Something
def initialize
#x=101
end
def getX
return #x
end
end
obj = Something.new
puts obj.getX
=>101
Something.new will create new instance of class Something with instance variable #x which will be visible to all methods of class Something.
But what will happen in second example without initialize(constructor) method.
class Something
def bla_bla_method
#x=101
end
def getX
return #x
end
end
obj = Something.new
puts obj.getX
=>nil
obj.bla_bla_method
puts obj.getX
=>101
So now bla_bla_method when called will create(like constructor) new instance_variable #x and will add that instance variable in "instance variable table" which is available to all methods again?
So now if i add new method "new_method" in class Something(in second example):
def new_method
#x=201
end
...
obj.bla_bla_method
puts obj.getX
=>101
obj.new_method
puts obj.getX
=>201
So if im getting this right, every method of class can create new instance variable which is available to all methods of class? And then every method can overwrite that instance variable over and over again(cyclical)?
I'm new to ruby so maybe here i'm doing big mistake or don't understand some basic concept , so dont yell :D
Instance variables for an object can be named and manipulated while the object exists. See the example below, when we are using the irb prompt object:
$ irb
> instance_variables # => [:#prompt]
> #foo # => nil
> instance_variables # => [:#prompt]
> #foo = 1 # => 1
> instance_variables # => [:#prompt, :#foo]
> #foo # => 1
Now, here's a description of Class#new from the docs:
Calls allocate to create a new object of class’s class, then invokes that object’s initialize method, passing it args. This is the method that ends up getting called whenever an object is constructed using .new.
One way to think of this is that initialize is functionally a regular method just like your other instance methods, only it gets called by Class#new to provide us with an easy way of setting default values (among others).
Technically, yes. But consider the notion of Object Oriented programming - Creating real world abstractions in form of classes and objects.
For instance, if you are talking about a student in a school; you know that is an abstractable entity. So you go ahead and encapsulate the common characteristic of student in a class Student.
initialize is a constructor. When you create a new student in your system, you would naturally want to supply few necessary details about him like his name, age and class.
So in initialize method you set those instance variables.
Few students also study in school; so naturally they will acquire some grade and stuff; to instantiate those details about the student, you would want to do that with something like this:
#Student(name, age, class)
kiddorails = Student.new("Kiddorails", 7, 2)
#to grade:
kiddorails.set_grades
#do stuff
So you can mutate and set the instance variables in an object, almost anywhere you want in a class; but the point is - Do it, where it makes sense.
PS: You should always set default values to the instance variables which are not set via initialize in initialize, if needed.
I have two classes and I want to copy all of the methods from one class to another. Some methods will have no arguments, some will have arguments, and some will have hashes as arguments. And I never know in advance which ones will. So I created this code, until I figured out that it didn't take into account arguments. Is there any way to get a list of methods from a Class, and then clone them exactly to another class?
def partial(cls)
cls.instance_methods(false).each do |method_name|
define_method(method_name) do
cls.new.method(method_name.to_sym).call
end
end
end
The methods are created on the fly using define_method in the first class, so I can't just use an include. The code above has cls being passed in, then it finds all of the instance methods that are actually written in that Class, not ones it inherits, and then creates a new method with the same name. When that method is called, it actually calls the other Class with its method of the same name. This works wonderfully, unless I have args. I had condition check to see if it had arguments, and then had it call a method with arguments, but it did not handle hashes very well. It made the hash as an array for an argument, which is not what I wanted.
I was wondering if there was a simple way to literally say "Hey you know this method, whatever it is, literally make the same thing for this other Class."
you could also try DelegateClass:
class NamedArray < DelegateClass(Array)
def initialize n
#name = n
super(Array.new)
end
def sayName
"My name is #{#name}"
end
end
You could try SimpleDelegator: http://www.ruby-doc.org/stdlib-1.9.3/libdoc/delegate/rdoc/SimpleDelegator.html
If all the methods are identical, why not just define them in a common module which you include in both classes? You mention not using include because the methods are dynamically defined, but that doesn't mean they won't be found when you mixin the module:
module Foo
def self.make_an_example_method(name)
define_method(name) do |*args|
puts "I am #{name} called with (#{args.inspect})"
end
end
end
class A
include Foo
end
class B
include Foo
end
Foo.make_an_example_method(:example)
Foo.make_an_example_method(:dynamic)
A.new.example # => I am example called with ([])
B.new.dynamic(1,2,3) # => I am dynamic called with ([1, 2, 3])
I understand that method_missing is something of a last resort when Ruby is processing messages. My understanding is that it goes up the Object hierarchy looking for a declared method matching the symbol, then back down looking for the lowest declared method_missing. This is much slower than a standard method call.
Is it possible to intercept sent messages before this point? I tried overriding send, and this works when the call to send is explicit, but not when it is implicit.
Not that I know of.
The most performant bet is usually to use method_missing to dynamically add the method being to a called to the class so that the overhead is only ever incurred once. From then on it calls the method like any other method.
Such as:
class Foo
def method_missing(name, str)
# log something out when we call method_missing so we know it only happens once
puts "Defining method named: #{name}"
# Define the new instance method
self.class.class_eval <<-CODE
def #{name}(arg1)
puts 'you passed in: ' + arg1.to_s
end
CODE
# Run the instance method we just created to return the value on this first run
send name, str
end
end
# See if it works
f = Foo.new
f.echo_string 'wtf'
f.echo_string 'hello'
f.echo_string 'yay!'
Which spits out this when run:
Defining method named: echo_string
you passed in: wtf
you passed in: hello
you passed in: yay!