I am using open4::background to open a process on the shell. open4::background allows me to use any class that implements <<, each, read, or to_s as a handle to stdx.
I am currently using a String, but every time a write occurs on stdout, it replaces the old value. Is there a simple class I can use to make new write append instead of replace, considering the acceptance of any class that implements certain string-like functions?
I am new to Ruby and I am just hoping to plug this part in. If anyone can contribute or point me to a simple existing class for this I'd appreciate it.
There is a thread explaining this with a sample implentation here: http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/151316 but I think that is a bit too complex for what I'm looking to do now. As a Ruby n00b, I'd feel more comfortable if someone else could massage that sample for me.
Thanks.
EDIT:
Per Phrogz's request, here is what I want to be able to do:
app_str = AppendedString
app_str = 'jeff'
app_str = 'walls'
puts app_str
# should display "jeffwalls"
What you want is to use StringIO to capture all the contents as a string for you.
(As #John says, repeated assignment you can't catch, but if you just want to accumulate all the values created by << then this will do it.)
app_str = AppendedString
app_str = 'jeff'
app_str = 'walls'
This would require overriding the assignment operator. Unfortunately, Ruby doesn't permit overriding the assignment operator.
Related
It just seems pretty logical to have it when there's even a downcase!. Has anyone else run into this use case in Ruby?
For the curious, I'm trying to do this:
def some_method(foo)
foo.downcase!.split!(" ")
## do some stuff with foo later. ##
end
some_method("A String like any other")
Instead of this:
def some_method(foo)
foo = foo.downcase.split(" ")
## do some stuff with foo later. ##
end
some_method("A String like any other")
Which isn't a really big deal...but ! just seems cooler.
Why is there no .split! in Ruby?
It just seems pretty logical to have it when there's even a downcase!.
It may be logical, but it is impossible: objects cannot change their class or their identity in Ruby. You may be thinking of Smalltalk's become: which doesn't and cannot exist in Ruby. become: changes the identity of an object and thus can also change its class.
I don't see this "use case" as very important.
The only thing a "bang method" is doing is saving you the trouble of assigning a variable.
The reason "bang methods" are the exception instead of the rule is they can produce confusing results if you don't understand them.
i.e. if you write
a = "string"
def my_upcase(string)
string.upcase!
end
b = my_upcase(a)
then both a and b will have transformed value even if you didn't intend to change a. Removing the exclamation point fixes this example, but if you're using mutable objects such as hashes and arrays you'll have to look out for this in other situations as well.
a = [1,2,3]
def get_last_element(array)
array.pop
end
b = get_last_element(a)
Since Array#pop has side effects, a is now 1,2. It has the last element removed, which might not have been what you intended. You could replace .pop here with [-1] or .last to get rid of the side effect
The exclamation point in a method name is essentially warning you that there are side effects. This is important in the concept of functional programming, which prescribes side effect free code. Ruby is very much a functional programming language by design (although it's very object oriented as well).
If your "use case" boils down to avoiding assigning a variable, that seems like a really minor discomfort.
For a more technical reason, though, see Jorg Mittag's answer. It's impossible to write a method which changes the class of self
this
def some_method(foo)
foo = foo.downcase.split(" ")
end
some_method("A String like any other")
is the same as this
def some_method(foo)
foo.downcase.split
end
some_method("A String like any other")
Actually, both of your methods return the same result. We can look at a few examples of methods that modify the caller.
array.map! return a modified original array
string.upcase! return a modified original string
However,
split modifies the class of the caller, changing a string to an array.
Notice how the above examples only modify the content of the object, instead of changing its class.
This is most likely why there isn't a split! method, although it's pretty easy to define one yourself.
#split creates an array out of a string, you can't permanently mutate(!) the string into being an array. Because the method is creating a new form from the source information(string), the only thing you need to do to make it permanent, is to bind it to a variable.
I hope I am not repeating anyone here, but I have been searching google and here and not coming up with anything. This question is really more a matter of "sexifying" my code.
What I am specifically trying to do is this:
Dir.new('some_directory').each do |file|
# is there a way to refer to the string 'some_directory' via a method or variable?
end
Thanks!
Not in general; it's totally up to the method itself what arguments the block gets called with, and by the time each has been called (which calls your block), the fact that the string 'some_directory' was passed to Dir.new has been long forgotten, i.e. they're quite separate things.
You can do something like this, though:
Dir.new(my_dir = 'some_directory').each do |file|
puts "#{my_dir} contains #{file}"
end
The reason it won't work is that new and each are two different methods so they don't have access to each others' parameters. To 'sexify' your code, you could consider creating a new method to contain the two method calls and pass the repeated parameter to that:
def do_something(dir)
Dir.new(dir).each do |file|
# use dir in some way
end
end
The fact that creating a new method has such a low overhead means it's entirely reasonable to create one for as small a chunk of code as this - and is one of the many reasons that make Ruby such a pleasure of a language to work with.
Just break it out into a variable. Ruby blocks are closures so they will have access -
dir = 'some_directory'
Dir.new(dir).each do |file|
# use dir here as expected.
end
I dont understand how #{...} construct is used in Ruby.
I've seen in used in the regexp example on http://www.ruby-doc.org/core-1.9.3/Regexp.html
place = "tokyo"
/#{place}/.match("Go to tokyo")
#=> #<MatchData "tokyo">
What exactly is this #{...} feature called and does anyone know of some good working examples of this.
Really appreciate the help.
Thanks!
Here's an example that's a bit simpler:
place = "Tokyo"
puts "Go to #{place}"
What the #{...} construct does is to execute the ruby code that it contains, and return a string representation of the result, which then is embedded in the string where the construct appears.
Another example:
place = "Tokyo"
puts "#{place} is a #{place.class} of #{place.length} characters"
In other words, your example is equivalent to:
/tokyo/.match("Go to tokyo")
Hope this helps.
Is called interpolation, and allows you to convert placeholders to the value they represent...
http://kconrails.com/2010/12/08/ruby-string-interpolation/
The #{...} is especially useful and used quite a lot in metaprogramming. It helps you to dispatch methods dynamically without knowing the name of these methods before run time.
if conf.rc and File.exists?( conf.rc )
YAML.load_file(conf.rc).each do |k,v|
conf.send("#{k}=" , v)
end
end
As you can see, until run time we do not know which methods are going to be dispatched. Through .send and #{...}, we can dynamically dispatch methods. For example, in above code depending on the values in conf.rc different methods can be dispatched.
Example is taken from Metaprogramming Ruby.
I am new to Ruby and am learning from reading an already written code.
I encounter this code:
label = TkLabel.new(#root) do
text 'Current Score: '
background 'lightblue'
end
What is the semantics of the syntax "do" above?
I played around with it and it seems like creating a TkLabel object then set its class variable text and background to be what specified in quote. However when I tried to do the same thing to a class I created, that didn't work.
Oh yeah, also about passing hash into function, such as
object.function('argument1'=>123, 'argument2'=>321)
How do I make a function that accepts that kind of argument?
Thanks in advance
What you're looking at is commonly referred to as a DSL, or Domain Specific Language.
At first glance it may not be clear why the code you see works, as text and background are seemingly undefined, but the trick here is that that code is actually evaluated in a scope in which they are. At it's simplest, the code driving it might look something like this:
class TkLabel
def initialize(root, &block)
#root = root
if block
# the code inside the block in your app is actually
# evaluated in the scope of the new instance of TkLabel
instance_eval(&block)
end
end
def text(value)
# set the text
end
def background(value)
# set the background
end
end
Second question first: that's just a hash. Create a function that accepts a single argument, and treat it like a hash.
The "semantics" are that initialize accepts a block (the do...end bit), and some methods accepting string parameters to set specific attributes.
Without knowing how you tried to do it, it's difficult to go much beyond that. Here are a few, possible, references that might help you over some initial hurdles.
Ruby is pretty decent at making miniature, internal DSLs because of its ability to accepts blocks and its forgiving (if arcane at times) syntax.
I was trying to add a method to the String class. This method should mutate the current string (of course it would be possible to write a not mutating version but I'd prefer the mutating one). I had no idea how to do this and after some googling I found the method rb_str_modify which makes a given string mutable. That's exactly what I need but I couldn't find an equivalent in the Ruby language. Did I miss something or is there really no possibility in the language itself?
Reopening Classes
All classes in Ruby are open for extension so you can simply do this ...
Class String
def my_new_method(args)
# Some sort of modification to self
self.replace "SOME CALCULATED VALUE"
end
end
... somewhere in your code. I've modified string a few times in different applications - usually I just put the modifications into one particular module, making it easy to reuse them or remove them as required.
Modifying individual objects
Modifying a class in its entirety is dangerous as it's very difficult to identify all of the consequences - I once broke Merb by modifying a method in the String class. It's much safer to modify particular objects. This is easy in Ruby - you use the extend keyword. You define a module, add your function and then modify the target object. This example ...
module Humor
def tickle
"hee, hee!"
end
end
a = "Grouchy"
a.extend Humor
a.tickle ยป "hee, hee!"
is taken from the Pickaxe book
Chris