var.split('/').delete_at(0)
upon inspection returns
""
no matter what the string, however....
var.split('/')
var.delete_at(0)
gives me no trouble. this is probably a stupid question, but are there some sort of restrictions/limitations regarding method chaining like this?
thanks,
brandon
The delete_at method deletes the element but returns the deleted element not the new array.
If you want to always return the object, you can use the tap method (available since Ruby 1.8.7).
a = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
a.delete_at(0) # => 1
a # => [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
a = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
a.tap { |a| a.delete_at(0) } # => returns [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
a # => [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
literally the first thing I tried to do was:
var.split('/').delete_at(0)
which upon inspection returned
""
no matter what the string
Are you sure? Try the string 'a/b':
irb(main):001:0> var = 'a/b'
=> "a/b"
irb(main):003:0> var.split('/').delete_at(0)
=> "a"
Note that the return value is the element deleted, not the array. The array which you created by performing the split was not stored anywhere and now you have no reference to it. You probably want to do this instead:
a = var.split('/')
a.delete_at(0)
If you always need to delete the first element, you can use other methods that return the object itself, such as slice!, for example:
s = 'foo/bar/baz'
#=> "foo/bar/baz"
s.split('/').slice!(1..-1)
#=> ["bar", "baz"]
Related
I'm sorry if this is a duplicate - I couldn't find anything similar in the existing posts.
I understand the difference between methods like shuffle and shuffle!. However, I am confused why calling the method more than once would result in changing the variables of all objects that previously referred to it? I'd expect once we apply a method, that the variable gets a value and we're done with it. Not that it continues to refer to the method call and the argument passed and that it would get re-evaluated later on.
I thought it's best to demonstrate with an example:
irb(main):001:1* def shuffle(arr)
irb(main):002:1* arr.shuffle!
irb(main):003:0> end
=> :shuffle
irb(main):004:0> arr = [1,2,3,4]
=> [1, 2, 3, 4]
irb(main):005:0> one = shuffle(arr)
=> [4, 2, 3, 1]
irb(main):006:0> two = shuffle(arr)
=> [1, 2, 4, 3]
irb(main):007:0> one
=> [1, 2, 4, 3]
So, here I'd expect one to stay [4, 2, 3, 1]. However, with each new call, all previous ones would get equated to the latest result of the method call. I realise it should have something to do with calling it with the same argument arr, but still doesn't quite make sense.
Array#shuffle! shuffles the array in-place and returns its receiver:
ary = [1, 2, 3, 4]
ary.equal?(ary.shuffle!) #=> true
Assigning the result from shuffle! to another variable doesn't change this. It merely results in two variables referring to the same array:
a = [1, 2, 3, 4]
b = a.shuffle!
a #=> [2, 4, 1, 3]
b #=> [2, 4, 1, 3]
a.equal?(b) #=> true
You probably want a new array. That's what Array#shuffle (without !) is for:
a = [1, 2, 3, 4]
b = a.shuffle
a #=> [1, 2, 3, 4]
b #=> [2, 4, 1, 3]
Even if shuffle returns the element in the original order, you'll get another array instance:
a = [1, 2, 3, 4]
b = a.shuffle until b == a
a #=> [1, 2, 3, 4]
b #=> [1, 2, 3, 4]
a.equal?(b) #=> false
Good day. I've tried writing this code in ruby
x = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
x.each do |a|
a + 1
end
When I type this in irb, I don't understand why does it return
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
I thought it would return
=> [2, 3, 4, 5, 6] # because of a + 1
each yields the array's elements to the given block (one after another) without modifying the array. At the end, it returns the array, as mentioned in the docs:
[...] passes each successive array element to the block; returns self
You are probably looking for map, which works similar to each but instead of returning self, it ...
[...] returns a new Array whose elements are the return values from the block
Example:
x = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
x.map { |a| a + 1 }
#=> [2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
Note that it returns a new array without actually modifying x. There's also map! (with !) which does modify the receiver.
I’m getting some weird results implementing cyclic permutation on the children of a multidimensional array.
When I manually define the array e.g.
arr = [
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
]
the output is different from when I obtain that same array by calling a method that builds it.
I’ve compared the manual array to the generated version and they’re exactly the same (class and values, etc).
I tried writing the same algorithm in JS and encountered the same issue.
Any idea what might be going on?
def Build_array(child_arr, n)
#Creates larger array with arr as element, n times over. For example Build_array([1,2,3], 3) returns [[1,2,3], [1,2,3], [1,2,3]]
parent_arr = Array.new(4)
0.upto(n) do |i|
parent_arr[i] = child_arr
end
return parent_arr
end
def Cylce_child(arr, steps_tocycle)
# example: Cylce_child([1, 2, 3, 4, 5], 2) returns [4, 5, 1, 2, 3]
0.upto(steps_tocycle - 1) do |i|
x = arr.pop()
arr.unshift(x)
end
return arr
end
def Permute_array(parent_array, x, y, z)
#x, y, z = number of steps to cycle each child array
parent_array[0] = Cylce_child(parent_array[0], x)
parent_array[1] = Cylce_child(parent_array[1], y)
parent_array[2] = Cylce_child(parent_array[2], z)
return parent_array
end
arr = Build_array([1, 2, 3, 4, 5], 4)
# arr = [[1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]]
puts "#{Permute_array(arr, 1, 2, 3)}"
# Line 34: When arr = Build_array([1, 2, 3, 4, 5], 4)
# Result (WRONG):
# [[5, 1, 2, 3, 4], [5, 1, 2, 3, 4], [5, 1, 2, 3, 4], [5, 1, 2, 3, 4]]
#
# Line 5: When arr = [[1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, # 2, 3, 4, 5]]
# Result (CORRECT):
# [[5, 1, 2, 3, 4], [4, 5, 1, 2, 3], [3, 4, 5, 1, 2], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]]
#
The problem is in the way you build the array.
This line:
parent_arr[i] = child_arr
does not put in parent_arr[i] a copy of child_arr but a reference to it.
This means your initial array contains four references to the same child array. Later on, when the code changes parent_arr[0], it changes the same array that child_arr was referring to in the build method. And that array is also parent_arr[1] and parrent_arr[2] and so on.
A simple solution to the problem is to put in parent_arr[i] a copy of child_arr:
parent_arr[i] = Array.new(child_arr)
I see where the bug was. Added the clone method to line 8 so that it now reads:
parent_arr[i] = child_arr.clone
#Old: parent_arr[i] = child_arr
Thanks Robin, for pointing me in the right direction.
This is a fairly common mistake to make in Ruby since arrays do not contain objects per-se, but object references, which are effectively pointers to a dynamically allocated object, not the object itself.
That means this code:
Array.new(4, [ ])
Will yield an array containing four identical references to the same object, that object being the second argument.
To see what happens:
Array.new(4, [ ]).map(&:object_id)
# => => [70127689565700, 70127689565700, 70127689565700, 70127689565700]
Notice four identical object IDs. All the more obvious if you call uniq on that.
To fix this you must supply a block that yields a different object each time:
Array.new(4) { [ ] }.map(&:object_id)
# => => [70127689538260, 70127689538240, 70127689538220, 70127689538200]
Now adding to one element does not impact the others.
That being said, there's a lot of issues in your code that can be resolved by employing Ruby as it was intended (e.g. more "idiomatic" code):
def build_array(child_arr, n)
# Duplicate the object given each time to avoid referencing the same thing
# N times. Each `dup` object is independent.
Array.new(4) do
child_arr.dup
end
end
def cycle_child(arr, steps_tocycle)
# Ruby has a rotate method built-in
arr.rotate(steps_tocycle)
end
# Using varargs (*args) you can just loop over how many positions were given dynamically
def permute_array(parent_array, *args)
# Zip is great for working with two arrays in parallel, they get "zippered" together.
# Also map is what you use for transforming one array into another in a 1:1 mapping
args.zip(parent_array).map do |a, p|
# Rotate each element the right number of positions
cycle_child(p, -a)
end
end
arr = build_array([1, 2, 3, 4, 5], 4)
# => [[1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]]
puts "#{permute_array(arr, 1, 2, 3)}"
# => [[5, 1, 2, 3, 4], [4, 5, 1, 2, 3], [3, 4, 5, 1, 2]]
A lot of these methods boil down to some very simple Ruby so they're not especially useful now, but this adapts the code as directly as possible for educational purposes.
nums1 = Array[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
nums2 = Array[5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
def mergeArrays (ar1, ar2)
result = (ar1 << ar2).flatten!
require 'pp'
pp %w(result)
end
As simple as this. I am trying to merge these two arrays and display the result. I am also brand-brand new to Ruby. This is the first function I am writing in this language. Trying to learn here. Also how can I remove the duplicates?
It would help if you give example inputs and outputs so we know exactly what you want. When you use the word "merge", I think you actually just want to add the arrays together:
ar1 = [1, 2, 3]
ar2 = [3, 4, 5]
ar3 = ar1 + ar2 # => [1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5]
Now if you want to remove duplicates, use Array#uniq:
ar4 = ar3.uniq # => [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
There is no need to write a method to do any of this since the Ruby Array class already supports it. You should skim through the documentation of the Array class to learn more things you can do with arrays.
What do you mean 'not working'?
Similar questions have been asked here:
Array Merge (Union)
You have two options: the pipe operator (a1 | a2) or concatenate-and-uniq ((a1 + a2).uniq).
Also be careful about using <<, this will modify the original variable, concatenating ar2 onto the end of the original ar1.
nums1 = Array[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
nums2 = Array[5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
result = (nums1<< nums2).flatten!
nums1
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
nums2
=> [5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
result
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
Additionally- just another Ruby tip, you do not need the destructive flatten! with ! versus the regular flatten. The regular flatten method will return a new Array, which you assign to result in your case. flatten! will flatten self in place, altering whatever Array it's called upon, rather than returning a new array.
You can merge Arrays using '+' operator and you can ignore the duplicated values using .uniq
>> nums1 = Array[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
>> nums2 = Array[5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
=> [5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
>> def mergeArrays (nums1, nums2)
>> result = (nums1 + nums2).uniq
>> end
=> :mergeArrays
>> mergeArrays(nums1,nums2)
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
nums1 = Array[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
nums2 = Array[5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
p nums1.concat(nums2).uniq
I am working through a book which gives examples of Ranges being converted to equivalent arrays using their "to_a" methods
When i run the code in irb I get the following warning
warning: default `to_a' will be obsolete
What is the the correct alternative to using to_a?
are there alternate ways to populate an array with a Range?
You can create an array with a range using splat,
>> a=*(1..10)
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
using Kernel Array method,
Array (1..10)
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
or using to_a
(1..10).to_a
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
This works for me in irb:
irb> (1..4).to_a
=> [1, 2, 3, 4]
I notice that:
irb> 1..4.to_a
(irb):1: warning: default `to_a' will be obsolete
ArgumentError: bad value for range
from (irb):1
So perhaps you are missing the parentheses?
(I am running Ruby 1.8.6 patchlevel 114)
Sounds like you're doing this:
0..10.to_a
The warning is from Fixnum#to_a, not from Range#to_a. Try this instead:
(0..10).to_a
Check this:
a = [*(1..10), :top, *10.downto( 1 )]
This is another way:
irb> [*1..10]
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
I just tried to use ranges from bigger to smaller amount and got the result I didn't expect:
irb(main):007:0> Array(1..5)
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
irb(main):008:0> Array(5..1)
=> []
That's because of ranges implementations.
So I had to use the following option:
(1..5).to_a.reverse