How do I check if a method is defined on some class directly, not by inheritance or by inclusion/extension? I want something like 'foo?' in the following:
class A
def a; end
end
module B
def b; end
end
class C < A
include B
def c; end
end
C.foo?(:a) #=> false
C.foo?(:b) #=> false
C.foo?(:c) #=> true
Use this:
C.instance_methods(false).include?(:a)
C.instance_methods(false).include?(:b)
C.instance_methods(false).include?(:c)
The method instance_methods return an Array of methods that an instance of this class would have. Passing false as first parameter returns only methods of this class, not methods of super classes.
So C.instance_methods(false) returns the list of methods defined by C.
Then you just have to check if that method is in the returned Array (this is what the include? calls do).
See docs
For objects you can use Object.respond_to?.
Returns true if obj responds to the given method.
For classes take a look at Module.instance_methods
Returns an array containing the names of the public and protected instance methods in the receiver.
Not exactly an answer to the question, but if you're reading this question, you might be interested in this, which uses .instance_methods(false)
class Object
# This is more or less how Ruby does method lookup internally
def who_responds_to?(method, klass_ancestors = nil)
if klass_ancestors.nil?
return who_responds_to?(method, self.class.ancestors)
end
if klass_ancestors.empty?
return nil
end
if klass_ancestors[0].instance_methods(false).include?(method)
return klass_ancestors[0]
end
klass_ancestors.shift
who_responds_to?(method, klass_ancestors)
end
end
For example
class Person
end
module Drummer
def drum
end
end
module Snowboarder
def jump
end
end
module Engineer
def code
end
end
class Bob < Person
include Drummer
include Snowboarder
include Engineer
def name
end
end
puts "who responds to name"
puts bob.who_responds_to?(:name)
puts "\n"
puts "who responds to code"
puts bob.who_responds_to?(:code)
puts "\n"
puts "who responds to jump"
puts bob.who_responds_to?(:jump)
puts "\n"
puts "who responds to drum"
puts bob.who_responds_to?(:drum)
puts "\n"
puts "who responds to dance"
puts bob.who_responds_to?(:dance)
yields
who responds to name
Bob
who responds to code
Engineer
who responds to jump
Snowboarder
who responds to drum
Drummer
who responds to dance
[this line intentionally blank because return value is nil]
Related
could you please explain me why the class variable cannot be accessed by attribute_accessors?
As i am trying here to have the list of all methods of all subclasses in one array it works a little different. It created array #method_names in every subclass with specific methods for every class ... so i do need to do a loop through subclasses.
What kind of variable/attribute is #method_names?
Thanks!
module First
class First_class
class << self
def info
puts "First_class method info."
puts #subclasses
puts #method_names
end
def inherited(subclass)
puts "#{subclass} located ..."
subclasses << subclass
end
def subclasses
#subclasses ||= []
end
def method_added(method_name)
puts "Method located #{method_name} ..."
method_names << method_name
end
def method_names
#method_names ||= []
end
end
def initialize
puts "Instance of First_class is created."
end
def first_method
end
end
class Second_class < First_class
def self.info
puts "Second_class method info."
puts #subclasses
puts #method_names
end
def second_method
end
def initialize
puts "Instance of Second_class is created."
end
end
class Third_class < First_class
def third_method
end
def initialize
puts "Instance of Third_class is created."
end
end
end
First::First_class.subclasses.each {
|subclass| puts subclass
subclass.method_names.each {
|methodn| puts methodn
}
}
#################UPDATE#########
Ok, maybe I put the question incorrectly.
Basically what is the difference for ##method_names(class variable) and #method_names (instance variable) if i do not create the instance of object? After inserting more inputs into #method_names it still inserts into the same object_id. So what is benefit of ##method_names?
updated to answer updated question.
Classes in ruby can have class variables. However if you modify the class level variable, ALL instances will be modified. This is not recommended but will illustrate the point. But also see this answer
class Foo
##bar = 'bar'
attr_accessor :bar
def initialize
#bar = 'bar'
end
def class_bar
##bar
end
def change_class_bar string
raise ArgumentError unless string.is_a?(String)
##bar = string
end
end
a = Foo.new
b = Foo.new
# change the class variable ##bar
b.change_class_bar 'wtf?'
# see both instances are changed because objects are passed by referrence
print 'a.class_bar is: '
puts a.class_bar
print 'b.class_bar is: '
puts b.class_bar
# change one instance only
a.bar = 'only a has changed'
print 'a.bar is: '
puts a.bar
print 'b.bar is still: '
puts b.bar
run this and you should get output:
a.class_bar is: wtf?
b.class_bar is: wtf?
a.bar is: only a has changed
b.bar is still: bar
original answer left here
#method_names is an instance variable of an instance of the class from which it was instantiated. However it cannot be accessed for read/write unless those attributes are defined with getter or setter methods defined.
ff = First::First_class.new
Instance of First_class is created.
=> #<First::First_class:0x00007fde5a6867b8>
ff.method_names
NoMethodError: undefined method `method_names' for #<First::First_class:0x00007fde5a6867b8>
Did you mean? methods
Now if you call ff.methods you will see all methods defined through standard Ruby inheritance.
As a side note, class names in Ruby conventionally use PascalCase see PascalCase. Mixed_case is discouraged.
I am working on a project of context-oriented programming in ruby. And I come to this problem:
Suppose that I have a class Klass:
class Klass
def my_method
proceed
end
end
I also have a proc stored inside a variable impl. And impl contains { puts "it works!" }.
From somewhere outside Klass, I would like to define a method called proceed inside the method my_method. So that if a call Klass.new.my_method, I get the result "it works".
So the final result should be something like that:
class Klass
def my_method
def proceed
puts "it works!"
end
proceed
end
end
Or if you have any other idea to make the call of proceed inside my_method working, it's also good. But the proceed of another method (let's say my_method_2) isn't the same as my_method.
In fact, the proceed of my_method represent an old version of my_method. And the proceed of my_method_2 represent an old version of my_method_2.
Thanks for your help
Disclaimer: you are doing it wrong!
There must be more robust, elegant and rubyish way to achieve what you want. If you still want to abuse metaprogramming, here you go:
class Klass
def self.proceeds
#proceeds ||= {}
end
def def_proceed
self.class.proceeds[caller.first[/`.*?'/]] = Proc.new
end
def proceed *args
self.class.proceeds[caller.first[/`.*?'/]].(*args)
end
def m_1
def_proceed { puts 1 }
proceed
end
def m_2
def_proceed { puts 2 }
proceed
end
end
inst = Klass.new
inst.m_1
#⇒ 1
inst.m_2
#⇒ 2
What you in fact need, is Module#prepend and call super from there.
One way of doing that is to construct a hash whose keys are the names of the methods calling proceed and whose values are procs that represent the implementations of proceed for each method calling it.
class Klass
singleton_class.send(:attr_reader, :proceeds)
#proceeds = {}
def my_method1(*args)
proceed(__method__,*args)
end
def my_method2(*args)
proceed(__method__,*args)
end
def proceed(m, *args)
self.class.proceeds[m].call(*args)
end
end
def define_proceed(m, &block)
Klass.proceeds[m] = Proc.new &block
end
define_proceed(:my_method1) { |*arr| arr.sum }
define_proceed(:my_method2) { |a,b| "%s-%s" % [a,b] }
k = Klass.new
k.my_method1(1,2,3) #=> 6
k.my_method2("cat", "dog") #=> "cat-dog"
I have a question about super that I wanted confirmed. Consider the following code example:
class InFasionHello
def hello person
greet person.name
end
def greet name
p 'Dude, hey ' + name
end
end
class OldFasionedHello < InFasionHello
def hello person
greet person.name if person.old_fashioned
super(person) if !person.old_fashioned
end
def greet name
p 'Good Day to you ' + name + '!'
end
end
My question is, if I was using OldFasionedHello, would infasionHello use the local greet to it self or the one from the class that called it via super?
The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
class Parent
def foo; p self; bar; end # This calls bar on the current object
def bar; puts "parent bar"; end
end
class Child < Parent
def foo; super; end # Removing this line changes nothing
def bar; puts "child bar"; end
end
Child.new.foo
#=> #<Child:0x007f980b051f40>
#=> child bar # NOTE! Not "parent bar"
Calling super doesn't change the self, as seen above. As such, methods you call on self (explicitly or implicitly, by not providing a receiver) still act upon the original instance, and use it for method lookup.
Calling super() is equivalent to calling:
self.class.superclass.instance_method(__method__).bind(self).call
…which helps to illustrate that you are calling the implementation of the method as though it is on the current instance. Note also that super is not the same as super(), since the former will magically pass along whatever parameters were supplied to the current method.
All the method calls inside given method are executed against self. self within an instance method is an instance itself and and it is an instance who is a receiver of this method. Hence it is initiating standard method lookup for given object so it will always execute the very top method with given name.
An extreme good example is class method:
class A
def foo
self.class
end
end
class B < A
end
B.new.foo #=> B even though foo comes from A
How would I use the parameter value as the instance variable name of an object?
This is the object
Class MyClass
def initialize(ex,ey)
#myvar = ex
#myothervar = ey
end
end
I have the following method
def test(element)
instanceofMyClass.element #this obviously doesnt work
end
How can I have the test method return either myvar or myothervar value depending on the element parameter. I don't want to write an if condition though, I want to pass myvar or myother var via element to the object instance if possible.
def test(element)
instanceofMyClass.send(element.to_sym)
end
You'll get a missing method error if instanceofMyClass doesn't respond to element.
def test(element)
instanceofmyclass.instance_variable_get element
end
test :#myvar # => ex
test :#myothervar # => ey
I like the simplicity of send(), though one bad thing with it is that it can be used to access privates. The issue is still remains solution below, but at least then it's explicitly specified, and reader can see which methods are to be forwarded. The first one just uses delegation, while the second one uses more dynamic way to define methods on the fly.
require 'forwardable'
class A
extend Forwardable
def_delegators :#myinstance, :foo, :bar
class B
def foo
puts 'foo called'
end
def bar
puts 'bar called'
end
def quux
puts 'quux called'
end
def bif
puts 'bif called'
end
end
def initialize
#myinstance = B.new
end
%i(quux bif).each do |meth| # note that only A#quux and A#bif are defined dynamically
define_method meth do |*args_but_we_do_not_have_any|
#myinstance.send(meth)
end
end
end
a = A.new
a.foo
a.bar
a.quux
a.bif
As a programming exercise, I've written a Ruby snippet that creates a class, instantiates two objects from that class, monkeypatches one object, and relies on method_missing to monkeypatch the other one.
Here's the deal. This works as intended:
class Monkey
def chatter
puts "I am a chattering monkey!"
end
def method_missing(m)
puts "No #{m}, so I'll make one..."
def screech
puts "This is the new screech."
end
end
end
m1 = Monkey.new
m2 = Monkey.new
m1.chatter
m2.chatter
def m1.screech
puts "Aaaaaargh!"
end
m1.screech
m2.screech
m2.screech
m1.screech
m2.screech
You'll notice that I have a parameter for method_missing. I did this because I was hoping to use define_method to dynamically create missing methods with the appropriate name. However, it doesn't work. In fact, even using define_method with a static name like so:
def method_missing(m)
puts "No #{m}, so I'll make one..."
define_method(:screech) do
puts "This is the new screech."
end
end
Ends with the following result:
ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (2 for 1)
method method_missing in untitled document at line 9
method method_missing in untitled document at line 9
at top level in untitled document at line 26
Program exited.
What makes the error message more bewildering is that I only have one argument for method_missing...
define_method is a (private) method of the object Class. You are calling it from an instance. There is no instance method called define_method, so it recurses to your method_missing, this time with :define_method (the name of the missing method), and :screech (the sole argument you passed to define_method).
Try this instead (to define the new method on all Monkey objects):
def method_missing(m)
puts "No #{m}, so I'll make one..."
self.class.send(:define_method, :screech) do
puts "This is the new screech."
end
end
Or this (to define it only on the object it is called upon, using the object's "eigenclass"):
def method_missing(m)
puts "No #{m}, so I'll make one..."
class << self
define_method(:screech) do
puts "This is the new screech."
end
end
end
self.class.define_method(:screech) doesn't work,because define_method is private method
you can do that
class << self
public :define_method
end
def method_missing(m)
puts "No #{m}, so I'll make one..."
Monkey.define_method(:screech) do
puts "This is the new screech."
end
def method_missing(m)
self.class.class_exec do
define_method(:screech) {puts "This is the new screech."}
end
end
screech method will be available for all Monkey objects.