This question already has answers here:
Strange, unexpected behavior (disappearing/changing values) when using Hash default value, e.g. Hash.new([])
(4 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
I'm getting some rather unexpected behavior from hashes in ruby
here's a simplified demonstration of the problem
estdata = ["a","b","c"]
outputHash = Hash.new({:IDs => [], :count => 0})
estdata.each do |x|
outputHash[x][:IDs] << x
outputHash[x][:count] +=1
end
p outputHash # => {}
p outputHash["a"] # => {:count=>3, :IDs=>["a", "b", "c"]}
So firstly, why does the first p output an empty hash when clearly outputHash isn't empty?
And secondly and much more to my frustration and confusion, why does is seem that every key in the has points to a single value (the hash containing the :count and :IDs keys) and how would I get around this?
With Hash.new and a parameter everything will point to the same object.
>> h = Hash.new('hello') #=> {}
>> h[:a] #=> "hello"
>> h[:a].object_id #=> 2152871580
>> h[:b].object_id #=> 2152871580
>> h[:c].object_id #=> 2152871580
What you want is the block form:
>> h = Hash.new { |h,k| h[k] = {} } #=> {}
>> h[:a].object_id #=> 2152698160
>> h[:b].object_id #=> 2152627480
Related
This question already has answers here:
Strange, unexpected behavior (disappearing/changing values) when using Hash default value, e.g. Hash.new([])
(4 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I'd like to create a new Hash with nested default values. I thought it should be like
h = Hash.new(count: 0, rating: 0)
So I can do stuff like
h['a'][:count] += 1
h['a'][:rating] += 1
and so on. But when I try it in the console it looks like this:
2.3.1 :046 > h = Hash.new(count: 0, rating: 0)
=> {}
2.3.1 :047 > h["a"]
=> {:count=>0, :rating=>0}
2.3.1 :048 > h["a"][:count]
=> 0
2.3.1 :049 > h["a"][:count] += 1
=> 1
2.3.1 :050 > h["b"][:count] += 1
=> 2
2.3.1 :051 > h
=> {}
So my questions are:
Why is h["b"][:count] += 1 returning 2 and not 1?
why is h empty?
Thanks in advance!
The doc for Hash::new explains the three ways of initializing a hash and, in your case, you are using an object in the Hash constructor:
If obj is specified, this single object will be used for all default values.
If you want that each missing key creates it's own object, create the hash with a block, like this:
h = Hash.new { |h,k| h[k] = { count: 0, rating: 0 } }
Then:
2.6.3 :012 > h
=> {}
2.6.3 :013 > h['a'][:count] = 5
=> 5
2.6.3 :015 > h
=> {"a"=>{:count=>5, :rating=>0}}
You can find this behaviour documented in the Hash::new documentation:
new → new_hash
new(obj) → new_hash
new {|hash, key| block } → new_hash
Returns a new, empty hash. If this hash is subsequently accessed by a
key that doesn't correspond to a hash entry, the value returned
depends on the style of new used to create the hash. In the first
form, the access returns nil. If obj is specified, this single
object will be used for all default values. If a block is
specified, it will be called with the hash object and the key, and
should return the default value. It is the block's responsibility to
store the value in the hash if required.
h = Hash.new("Go Fish")
h["a"] = 100
h["b"] = 200
h["a"] #=> 100
h["c"] #=> "Go Fish"
# The following alters the single default object
h["c"].upcase! #=> "GO FISH"
h["d"] #=> "GO FISH"
h.keys #=> ["a", "b"]
# While this creates a new default object each time
h = Hash.new { |hash, key| hash[key] = "Go Fish: #{key}" }
h["c"] #=> "Go Fish: c"
h["c"].upcase! #=> "GO FISH: C"
h["d"] #=> "Go Fish: d"
h.keys #=> ["c", "d"]
In your example h["a"] and h["b"] both return the exact same default hash object. Meaning that if you change h["a"], h["b"] is also changed. Since you never set h["a"] or h["b"] the hash appears empty.
To assign a new hash on access you'll have to use the block syntax as shown by luis.parravicini.
This question already has answers here:
Strange, unexpected behavior (disappearing/changing values) when using Hash default value, e.g. Hash.new([])
(4 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I expected:
h = Hash.new([])
h['a'] << 'b'
h['a'] << 'c'
h # => {}
to give {'a' => ['b','c']}, not an empty hash.
I also found out that the insert operation targets the default value, because after the code above it is euqal to ['b','c']:
h.default # => ['b','c']
I am looking for an explanation on why it does not work and how to do it optimally so it works.
The reason why your line didn't work is that Hash, upon accessing a missing key, simply returns the default value (whatever you specified), without assigning it to the key. And since your default value is a complex mutable object (and it's the very same object that is returned every time), you get what you observed: all values are shoveled straight into the default value, bypassing the hash. This is probably the most common mistake with hashes and mutable default values.
To do what you want, use the third form of Hash.new
new {|hash, key| block } → new_hash
like this, for example
h = Hash.new {|h, k| h[k] = [] }
It's because you modify this specific object you passed as a default value. So:
h = Hash.new([])
h['a'] << 'b'
h['a'] << 'c'
h['b'] # or h['a'] or h[:virtually_anything]
# => ["b", "c"]
It's because h has no key 'a', you need to initialize it before or it's just a default value reset:
h = Hash.new([])
h['a'] = ['b']
h['a'] << 'c'
h['a'] #=> ["b", "c"]
h #=> {"a"=>["b", "c"]}
This behave the same:
k = Hash.new
k.default = []
While, as explained by Sergio Tulentsev, (https://stackoverflow.com/a/53614695/5239030) this creates the key "on the fly", try this:
k = Hash.new {|h, k| puts "Just created a new key: #{k}"; h[k] = [] }
p k['a'] << 'a'
p k['a'] << 'a'
p k['b'] << 'b'
p k
This question already has answers here:
Strange, unexpected behavior (disappearing/changing values) when using Hash default value, e.g. Hash.new([])
(4 answers)
Initializing a Hash with empty array unexpected behaviour [duplicate]
(1 answer)
Closed 4 years ago.
When I initialize a Ruby hash with a default value like 0 and create a new entry in the hash and increment it behaves as expected:
irb(main):001:0> h1 = Hash.new(0)
=> {}
irb(main):002:0> h1[:foo] += 1
=> 1
irb(main):003:0> h1
=> {:foo=>1}
irb(main):004:0> h1[:foo]
=> 1
Notice how h1 #=> {:foo=>1} and h1[:foo] #=> 1. That's what I was expecting to see.
Except if I use a default value of an empty array then this is what happens:
irb(main):005:0> h2 = Hash.new([])
=> {}
irb(main):006:0> h2[:foo] << "cats"
=> ["cats"]
irb(main):007:0> h2
=> {}
irb(main):008:0> h2[:foo]
=> ["cats"]
Notice how h2 #=> {} and h2[:foo] #=> ["cats"]. I don't know why this is happening.
What is going on here?
Why does h2 look like an empty hash but then still has a value with the key :foo?
If I use some a block then the expected behavior happens:
irb(main):001:0> h3 = Hash.new {|hash, key| hash[key] = [] }
=> {}
irb(main):002:0> h3[:foo] << "cats"
=> ["cats"]
irb(main):003:0> h3
=> {:foo=>["cats"]}
irb(main):004:0> h3[:foo]
=> ["cats"]
Notice how h2 #=> {:foo=>["cats"]} and h3[:foo] #=> ["cats"]. That's what I was expecting to see.
The answer is in Hash.new. In short:
If obj ([] in your case) is specified, this single object will be used for all default values. If a block is specified, it will be called with the hash object and the key, and should return the default value. It is the block's responsibility to store the value in the hash if required.
Initialise with a block to set non-nil defaults.
I'm currently going through the Ruby on Rails tutorial by Michael Hartl
Not understanding the meaning of this statement found in section 4.4.1:
Hashes, in contrast, are different. While the array constructor
Array.new takes an initial value for the array, Hash.new takes a
default value for the hash, which is the value of the hash for a
nonexistent key:
Could someone help explain what is meant by this? I don't understand what the author is trying to get at regarding how hashes differ from arrays in the context of this section of the book
You can always try out the code in irb or rails console to find out what they mean.
Array.new
# => []
Array.new(7)
# => [nil, nil, nil, nil, nil, nil, nil]
h1 = Hash.new
h1['abc']
# => nil
h2 = Hash.new(7)
h2['abc']
# => 7
Arrays and hashes both have a constructor method that takes a value. What this value is used for is different between the two.
For arrays, the value is used to initialize the array (example taken from mentioned tutorial):
a = Array.new([1, 3, 2])
# `a` is equal to [1, 3, 2]
Unlike arrays, the new constructor for hashes doesn't use its passed arguments to initialize the hash. So, for example, typing h = Hash.new('a', 1) does not initialize the hash with a (key, value) pair of a and 1:
h = Hash.new('a', 1) # NO. Does not give you { 'a' => 1 }!
Instead, passing a value to Hash.new causes the hash to use that value as a default when a non-existent key is passed. Normally, hashes return nil for non-existent keys, but by passing a default value, you can have hashes return the default in those cases:
nilHash = { 'x' => 5 }
nilHash['x'] # Return 5, because the key 'x' exists in nilHash
nilHash['foo'] # Returns nil, because there is no key 'foo' in nilHash
defaultHash = Hash.new(100)
defaultHash['x'] = 5
defaultHash['x'] # Return 5, because the key 'x' exists in defaultHash
defaultHash['foo']
# Returns 100 instead of nil, because you passed 100
# as the default value for non-existent keys for this hash
Begin by reading the docs for the class method Hash#new. You will see there are three forms:
new → new_hash
new(obj) → new_hash
new {|hash, key| block } → new_hash
Creating an Empty Hash
The first form is used to create an empty hash:
h = Hash.new #=> {}
which is more commonly written:
h = {} #=> {}
The other two ways of creating a hash with Hash#new establish a default value for a key/value pair when the hash does not already contain the key.
Hash.new with an argument
You can create a hash with a default value in one of two ways:
Hash.new(<default value>)
or
h = Hash.new # or h = {}
h.default = <default value>
Suppose the default value for the hash were 4; that is:
h = Hash.new(4) #=> {}
h[:pop] = 7 #=> 7
h[:pop] += 1 #=> 8
h[:pop] #=> 8
h #=> {:pop=>8}
h[:chips] #=> 4
h #=> {:pop=>8}
h[:chips] += 1 #=> 5
h #=> {:pop=>8, :chips=>5}
h[:chips] #=> 5
Notice that the default value does not affect the value of :pop. That's because it was created with an assignment:
h[:pop] = 7
h[:chips] by itself merely returns the default value (4); it does not add the key/value pair :chips=>4 to the hash! I repeat: it does not add the key/value pair to the hash. That's important!
h[:chips] += 1
is shorthand for:
h[:chips] = h[:chips] + 1
Since the hash h does not have a key :chips when h[:chips] on the right side of the equals sign is evaluated, it returns the default value of 4, then 1 is added to make it 5 and that value is assigned to h[:chips], which adds the key value pair :chips=>5 to the hash, as seen in following line. The last line merely reports the value for the existing key :chips.
So why would you want to establish a default value? I would venture that the main reason is to be able to initialize it with zero, so you can use:
h[k] += 1
instead of
k[k] = (h.key?(k)) ? h[k] + 1 : 1
or the trick:
h[k] = (h[k] ||= 0) + 1
(which only works when hash values are intended to be non-nil). Incidentally, key? is aka has_key?.
Can we make the default a string instead? Of course:
h = Hash.new('magpie')
h[:bluebird] #=> "magpie"
h #=> {}
h[:bluebird] = h[:bluebird] #=> "magpie"
h #=> {:bluebird=>"magpie"}
h[:redbird] = h[:redbird] #=> "magpie"
h #=> {:bluebird=>"magpie", :redbird=>"magpie"}
h[:bluebird] << "jay" #=> "magpiejay"
h #=> {:bluebird=>"magpiejay", :redbird=>"magpiejay"}
You may be scratching your head over the last line: why did h[:bluebird] << "jay" cause h[:redbird] to change?? Perhaps this will explain what's going on here:
h[:robin] #=> "magpiejay"
h[:robin].object_id #=> 2156227520
h[:bluebird].object_id #=> 2156227520
h[:redbird].object_id #=> 2156227520
h[:robin] merely returns the default value, which we see has been changed from "magpie" to "magpiejay". Now look at the object_id's for the default value and for the values associated with the keys :bluebird and :redbird. As you see, all values are the same object, so if we change one, we change all the the others, including the default value. It is now evident why h[:bluebird] << "jay" changed the default value.
We can clarify this further by adding a stately eagle:
h[:eagle] #=> "magpiejay"
h[:eagle] += "starling" #=> "magpiejaystarling"
h[:eagle].object_id #=> 2157098780
h #=> {:bluebird=>"magpiejay", :redbird=>"magpiejay", :eagle=>"magpiejaystarling"}
Because
h[:eagle] += "starling" #=> "magpiejaystarling"
is equivalent to:
h[:eagle] = h[:eagle] + "starling"
we have created a new object on the right side of the equals sign and assigned it to h[:eagle]. That's why the values for the keys :bluebird and :redbird are unaffected and h[:eagle] has a different object_id.
We have the similar problems if we write: Hash.new([]) or Hash.new({}). If there are ever reasons to use those defaults, I'm not aware of them. It certainly can be very useful for the default value to be an empty string, array or hash, but for that you need the third form of Hash.new, which takes a block.
Hash.new with a block
We now consider the third and final version of Hash#new, which takes a block, like so:
Hash.new { |h,k| ??? }
You may be expecting this to be devilishly complex and subtle, certainly much harder to grasp than the other two forms of the method. If so, you'd be wrong. It's actually quite simple, if you think of it as looking like this:
Hash.new { |h,k| h[k] = ??? }
In other words, Ruby is saying to you, "The hash h doesn't have the key k. What would you like it's value to be? Now consider the following:
h7 = Hash.new { |h,k| h[k]=7 }
hs = Hash.new { |h,k| h[k]='cat' }
ha = Hash.new { |h,k| h[k]=[] }
hh = Hash.new { |h,k| h[k]={} }
h7[:a] += 3 #=> 10
hs[:b] << 'nip' #=> "catnip"
ha[:c] << 4 << 6 #=> [4, 6]
ha[:d] << 7 #=> [7]
ha #=> {:c=>[4, 6], :d=>[7]}
hh[:k].merge({b: 4}) #=> {:b=>4}
hh #=> {}
hh[:k].merge!({b: 4} ) #=> {:b=>4}
hh #=> {:k=>{:b=>4}}
Notice that you cannot write ha = Hash.new { |h,k| [] } (or equivalently, ha = Hash.new { [] }) and expect h[k] => [] to be added to the hash. You can do whatever you like within the block; you are neither required nor limited to specifying a value for the key. In effect, within the block Ruby is actually saying, "A key that is not in the hash has been referenced without a value. I'm giving you that reference and also a reference to the hash. That will allow you to add that key with a value to the hash, if that's what you want to do, but what you do in this block is entirely your business."
The default values for the hashes h7, hs, ha and hh are respectively the number 7 (though it would be easier to simply enter 7 as An argument), an empty string, an empty array or an empty hash. Probably the last two are the most common use of Hash#new with a block, as in:
array = [[:a, 1], [:b, 3], [:a, 4], [:b, 6]]
array.each_with_object(Hash.new {|h,k| h[k] = []}) { |(k,v),h| h[k] << v }
#=> {:a=>[1, 4], :b=>[3, 6]}
That's really about all there is to the last form of Hash#new.
This question already has answers here:
Strange, unexpected behavior (disappearing/changing values) when using Hash default value, e.g. Hash.new([])
(4 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
hash = Hash.new(Hash.new([]))
hash[1][2] << 3
hash[1][2] # => [3]
hash # => {}
hash.keys # => []
hash.values # => []
What's going on? Ruby's hiding data (1.9.3p125)
What's going on? Ruby's hiding data (1.9.3p125)
Ruby hides neither data nor its docs.
Default value you pass into the Hash constructor is returned whenever the key is not found in the hash. But this default value is never actually stored into the hash on its own.
To get what you want you should use Hash constructor with block and store default value into the hash yourself (on both levels of your nested hash):
hash = Hash.new { |hash, key| hash[key] = Hash.new { |h, k| h[k] = [] } }
hash[1][2] << 3
p hash[1][2] #=> [3]
p hash #=> {1=>{2=>[3]}}
p hash.keys #=> [1]
p hash.values #=> [{2=>[3]}]
It's simple. If you pass an object to a Hash constructor, it'll become a default value for all missing keys in that hash. What's interesting is that this value is mutable. Observe:
hash = Hash.new(Hash.new([]))
# mutate default value for nested hash
hash[1][2] << 3
# default value in action
hash[1][2] # => [3]
# and again
hash[1][3] # => [3]
# and again
hash[1][4] # => [3]
# set a plain hash (without default value)
hash[1] = {}
# what? Where did my [3] go?
hash[1][2] # => nil
# ah, here it is!
hash[2][3] # => [3]
I get a try with this in irb.
Seams Ruby does not tag element as "visible" except affecting value over default explicitly via = for instance.
hash = Hash.new(Hash.new([]))
hash[1] = Hash.new([])
hash[1][2] = [3]
hash
#=> {1=>{2=>[3]}}
May be some setters are missing this "undefaulting" behavior ...