Related
I'm working my way through a simple tutorial of each vs for loops in Ruby. This is supposed to be one of the simpler examples but for some reason, I don't understand the interaction between the yield statements and the for loop.
class MyEachThing
def each
yield 1
yield 42
yield 2
yield 42
yield 3
end
end
for i in MyEachThing.new
p i
end
# >> 1
# >> 42
# >> 2
# >> 42
# >> 3
Yield in this next example that I made up makes sense to me:
def calling
p yield(45)
end
calling {|i| i*2}
I just don't get how the first example works. Thank you for the help.
for i in MyEachThing.new
p i
end
is similar to this:
MyEachThing.new.each do |i|
p i
end
which means, you are calling each method on MyEachThing instance and passing i to the block.
And, yield is equivalent to: block.call means, you're calling the block with the passed argument (in this case i).
yield i is equivalent to: block.call(i) and your block is just printing the value of i.
in Ruby it's easy to tell loop to go to next item
(1..10).each do |a|
next if a.even?
puts a
end
result =>
1
3
5
7
9
but what if I need to call next from outside of the loop (e.g.: method)
def my_complex_method(item)
next if item.even? # this will obviously fail
end
(1..10).each do |a|
my_complex_method(a)
puts a
end
only solution I found and works is to use throw & catch like in SO question How to break outer cycle in Ruby?
def my_complex_method(item)
throw(:skip) if item.even?
end
(1..10).each do |a|
catch(:skip) do
my_complex_method(a)
puts a
end
end
My question is: anyone got any more niftier solution to do this ?? or is throw/catch only way to do this ??
Also what If I want to call my_complex_method not only as a part of that loop (=> don't throw :skip) , can I somehow tell my method it's called from a loop ?
You complex method could return a boolean, and then you compare on your loop like this:
def my_complex_method(item)
true if item.even?
end
(1..10).each do |a|
next if my_complex_method(a)
puts a
end
A simple approach, but different from the try catch one.
UPDATE
As item.even? already return a boolean value, you don't need the true if item.even? part, you can do as follow:
def my_complex_method(item)
item.even?
end
Enumerator#next and Enumerator#peek will be good option to goo :
def my_complex_method(e)
return if e.peek.even?
p e.peek
end
enum = (1..5).each
enum.size.times do |a|
my_complex_method(enum)
enum.next
end
Output
1
3
5
If all you need is to take actions on only some of values, based on value returned by my_complex_method you could use enumerators wisely:
(1..10).map { |a| [a, my_complex_method(a)] }.each do |a, success|
puts a if success
end
You could define method accepting block and take some action in this block based on success or failure there:
(1..10).each do |a|
my_complex_method { |success| next if success }
end
Thanks to scoping, you are able not to use `catch`/`throw`, and call `next` based on processing status.
So, maybe I'm over-complicating something that isn't that hard, but here goes.
In Ruby, there's a method of looping called .each. I think that this is very cool--but what I'm finding less cool is the amount of stuff written about the pipe that comes after it (or any other do-type loop in Ruby, it would seem). Sometimes there is a single thing in the pipe:
basket.each do |fruit|
puts "This is a #{fruit}.\n"
end
But sometimes, there are two things in this pipe, like so:
contacts.each do |name, profession|
puts "#{name} is a #{profession}.\n"
end
So what I'm wondering now, is it possible to have more than two items in that pipe? Like if I have a huge, big, and ugly multi-dim array?
What if I add things to my pipe and they're not there? Will it give the value in the pipe nil? Or will it throw an error?
Again, sorry if this is obvious to long-time Rubyists, but I came from the land of strictly typed variables, and I'm now leaving PHP land, too. :)
EDIT
So what if I have something like this:
categories = [["Bathroom", "Bathroom Fixtures", "Plumbing"],
["Ceiling Fixtures", "Chandeliers", "Flush Mounts", "Mini Chandeliers", "Semi-Flush Mounts", "Pendants", "Track Lighting", "Mini Pendants", "Directional", "Island/Pool Table", "Recessed Lighting"],
["Outdoor", "Exterior", "Landscape Lighting"],
["Fans", "Fans", "Fan Accessories"],
["Lamps", "Lamps", "Shades"],
["Wall Fixtures", "Sconces", "Foyer/Hall Lanterns"],
["Specialty", "Undercabinet", "Light Bulbs", "Lighting Controls", "Glass", "Specialty Items", "Utility"],
["Home Decor", "Decor/Home Accents", "Furniture"]]
Can I loop through it like this?
categories.each do |category, subcats|
puts "The main category is #{category} and the sub categories are: "
subcats.each do |subcat|
puts "#{subcat}, "
end
end
Lets start with a break down of the each method.
a = [1,2,3,4,5]
a.each do |num|
puts num
end
# 1
# 2
# 3
# 4
# 5
The do ... end portion is called a block
This block accepts one parameter (an element in the array)
The way you pass parameters to a block is with |'s
If you supply more than one argument to the block:
a.each do |num, x|
puts num
puts x
end
# 1
#
# 2
#
# 3
#
# 4
#
# 5
#
x is nil for each iteration.
Lets write a method of our own that uses blocks so you can see how they work.
def my_each(a=[])
a.each do |x|
yield x if block_given?
end
end
my_each(a) do |num|
puts num
end
Here yield x is saying, execute the supplied block and pass x to it.
If you pass another parameter to your block, it is nil. Why?
Our implementation of my_each doesn't know anything about a second parameter so it does not yield anything so it remains nil.
When you have a simple array, the following things happen:
arr = [1,2,3,4]
arr.each do |x|
p x
end
1
2
3
4
=> [1,2,3,4]
arr.each do |x,y|
p x
p y
end
1
nil
2
nil
3
nil
4
nil
=> [1,2,3,4]
so if ruby doesn't know what to put into the block argument, it simply sets it to nil. Now consider a nested array:
arr = [[1,2],[3,4],[5,6]]
arr.each do |x|
p x
end
[1, 2]
[3, 4]
[5, 6]
=> [[1,2],[3,4],[5,6]]
arr.each do |x,y|
p x
p y
end
1
2
3
4
5
6
=> [[1,2],[3,4],[5,6]]
In this case, ruby assumes that you want to assign the two elements of the inner arrays to the block variables x and y. The same thing applies to hashes, where Ruby assigns the key and value to x and y:
hash = {1 => 2, 3 => 4, 5 => 6}
hash.each do |x,y|
p x
p y
end
1
2
3
4
5
6
=> {1=>2,3=>4,5=>6}
When you don't have enough elements in the nested arrays, the block variables are assigned nil, indeed. When there are too many of them, they are simply discarded:
arr = [[1,2,3],[4,5],[6]]
arr.each do |x,y|
p x
p y
end
1
2
4
5
6
nil
=> [[1,2,3],[4,5],[6]]
pretty straightforward!
EDIT:
As for your edited question: no, you cannot apply this 1:1 to Ruby code, you would have to manually apply the splat operator (*) to subcats. This way, ruby assigns all remaining elements to the 'splatted' block variable:
categories.each do |category,*subcats|
puts "The main category is #{category} and the sub categories are: "
subcats.each do |subcat|
puts "#{subcat}, "
end
end
although i would generate a comma-separated list of subcategories like this:
categories.each do |category,*subcats|
puts "The main category is #{category} and the sub categories are: "
puts subcats.join(', ')
end
EDIT 2:
Oh, and you would not handle a huge ugly evil multidimensional array by defining a lot of block parameters for its elements. You probably would iterate through it using nested loops as in almost every other language, if only because you never know how many elements it contains.
The pipes you are talking about is a parameter list of a block "variable". Actually that is some kind of a function pointer, and the pipes marks the parameter list.
Check the description of array.each.
This is not magic, the number of parameters is defined in the block, you can't add more than that, if you do, they won't get a value. The reason is for "sometime" there can be more than one, is that it's probably a hash.each, which has two parameters, a key and a value.
You can create your own functions with block parameters, read this.
For your iteration problem, you can use a hash, or you can write your own iterator.
Multiple Arguments to a Block
Array#each iterates over an array object, and passes either a single object into the block or returns an enumerator. You can redefine this behavior, but #each is the wrong method if you want multiple values at a time; see Enumerator#each_slice for an alternative.
Data Structures
Your problem would be easier to solve with the right data structure. Instead of an array, you should consider using a hash. For example:
categories =
{"Bathroom"=>["Bathroom Fixtures", "Plumbing"],
"Ceiling Fixtures"=>["Chandeliers", "Flush Mounts", "Mini Chandeliers"]}
categories.each do |key, value|
puts "#{key}:"
value.each { |v| puts "\t%s" % v }
end
This returns:
Bathroom:
Bathroom Fixtures
Plumbing
Ceiling Fixtures:
Chandeliers
Flush Mounts
Mini Chandeliers
code:
c = 0
items.each { |i|
puts i.to_s
# if c > 9 escape the each iteration early - and do not repeat
c++
}
I want to grab the first 10 items then leave the "each" loop.
What do I replace the commented line with? is there a better approach? something more Ruby idiomatic?
While the break solution works, I think a more functional approach really suits this problem. You want to take the first 10 elements and print them so try
items.take(10).each { |i| puts i.to_s }
There is no ++ operator in Ruby. It's also convention to use do and end for multi-line blocks. Modifying your solution yields:
c = 0
items.each do |i|
puts i.to_s
break if c > 9
c += 1
end
Or also:
items.each_with_index do |i, c|
puts i.to_s
break if c > 9
end
See each_with_index and also Programming Ruby Break, Redo, and Next.
Update: Chuck's answer with ranges is more Ruby-like, and nimrodm's answer using take is even better.
break works for escaping early from a loop, but it's more idiomatic just to do items[0..9].each {|i| puts i}. (And if all you're doing is literally printing the items with no changes at all, you can just do puts items[0..9].)
Another option would be
items.first(10).each do |i|
puts i.to_s
end
That reads a little more easily to me than breaking on an iterator, and first will return only as many items as available if there aren't enough.
Another variant:
puts items.first(10)
Note that this works fine with arrays of less than 10 items:
>> nums = (1..5).to_a
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
>> puts nums.first(10)
1
2
3
4
5
(One other note, a lot of people are offering some form of puts i.to_s, but in such a case, isn't .to_s redundant? puts will automatically call .to_s on a non-string to print it out, I thought. You would only need .to_s if you wanted to say puts 'A' + i.to_s or the like.)
Does this look like what you want?
10.times { |i|
puts items[i].to_s
}
items.each_with_index { |i, c| puts i and break if c <= 9 }
It was asked:
I want to grab the first 10 items then leave the "each" loop.
Use throw and catch to accomplish this, with few changes to the example:
catch(:done) do
c = 0
collected = []
items.each do |item|
collected << item
throw(:done, collected) if c == 9 # started at 0
c += 1
end
collected # if the list is less than 10 long, return what was collected
end
Simply throw the label :done with collected and the catch which is waiting for :done will return collected.
And to "ruby" this up a bit:
catch(:done) do
items.inject([]) do |collected, item|
throw(:done, collected) if collected.size == 10
collected << item # collected gets returned here and populates the first argument of this block
end
end
I do not know why some people refuse to use inject and use reduce instead (they are equivalent) when clearly the empty array given to inject([]) is being injected with items! Anyhow, the inject will return collected if there are less than 10 items.
Most answers are trying to answer what might be the intent of the question instead of what was asked and items.take(10) does make perfect sense in that case. But I can imagine wanting to grab the first items that fit within my $100 budget. Then you can simply:
catch(:done) do
items.inject({items: [], budget: 100}) do |ledger, item|
remainder = ledger[:budget] - item.price
if remainder < 0
throw(:done, ledger)
else
ledger.tap do |this|
this[:items] << item
this[:budget] = remainder
end # tap just returns what is being tapped into, in this case, ledger
end
end
end
How do I do this type of for loop in Ruby?
for(int i=0; i<array.length; i++) {
}
array.each do |element|
element.do_stuff
end
or
for element in array do
element.do_stuff
end
If you need index, you can use this:
array.each_with_index do |element,index|
element.do_stuff(index)
end
limit = array.length;
for counter in 0..limit
--- make some actions ---
end
the other way to do that is the following
3.times do |n|
puts n;
end
thats will print 0, 1, 2, so could be used like array iterator also
Think that variant better fit to the author's needs
I keep hitting this as a top link for google "ruby for loop", so I wanted to add a solution for loops where the step wasn't simply '1'. For these cases, you can use the 'step' method that exists on Numerics and Date objects. I think this is a close approximation for a 'for' loop.
start = Date.new(2013,06,30)
stop = Date.new(2011,06,30)
# step back in time over two years, one week at a time
start.step(stop, -7).each do |d|
puts d
end
The equivalence would be
for i in (0...array.size)
end
or
(0...array.size).each do |i|
end
or
i = 0
while i < array.size do
array[i]
i = i + 1 # where you may freely set i to any value
end
array.each_index do |i|
...
end
It's not very Rubyish, but it's the best way to do the for loop from question in Ruby
To iterate a loop a fixed number of times, try:
n.times do
#Something to be done n times
end
If you don't need to access your array, (just a simple for loop) you can use upto or each :
Upto:
2.upto(4) {|i| puts i}
2
3
4
Each:
(2..4).each {|i| puts i}
2
3
4
What? From 2010 and nobody mentioned Ruby has a fine for /in loop (it's just nobody uses it):
ar = [1,2,3,4,5,6]
for item in ar
puts item
end
['foo', 'bar', 'baz'].each_with_index {|j, i| puts "#{i} #{j}"}
Ruby's enumeration loop syntax is different:
collection.each do |item|
...
end
This reads as "a call to the 'each' method of the array object instance 'collection' that takes block with 'blockargument' as argument". The block syntax in Ruby is 'do ... end' or '{ ... }' for single line statements.
The block argument '|item|' is optional but if provided, the first argument automatically represents the looped enumerated item.