I'm trying to optimize some code and I want to instead on checking a value on every method call just define the method to respond with the checking already pre-calculate, because this checking doesn't change on the whole live of the instance.
I decided to define different versions of the method for every instance created. More or less this way:
class TestingSingletonMethodsWithVariable
METHODS = %w(a b c d)
def initialize(favorite_method)
class << self
METHODS.each do |method_name|
if( favorite_method == method_name )
define_method method_name do
puts "#{method_name} its my favorite method"
end
else
define_method method_name do
puts "#{method_name} its not my favorite method"
end
end
end
end
end
end
t = TestingSingletonMethodsWithVariable.new('b')
t.a
t.b
t.c
t.d
# $ ruby test/testing_singleton_methods_with_variable.rb
# test/testing_singleton_methods_with_variable.rb:7:in `initialize': undefined local variable or method `favorite_method' for #<Class:#<TestingSingletonMethodsWithVariable:0x1001a77b8>> (NameError)
# from test/testing_singleton_methods_with_variable.rb:6:in `each'
# from test/testing_singleton_methods_with_variable.rb:6:in `initialize'
# from test/testing_singleton_methods_with_variable.rb:21:in `new'
# from test/testing_singleton_methods_with_variable.rb:21
What is happening is that something weird is happening with the variables: the variables declares out-side the class << self block are not visible for the variables inside.
Any one can explain me how can I do the behavior I'm looking for?
Thanks
In Ruby, only blocks can be closures, class bodies (as well as module and method bodies) cannot be closures. Or to put it another way: only blocks create a new nested lexical scope, all others (module bodies, class bodies, method bodies and script bodies) create new top-level scopes.
So, you will need a block. Normally, this would mean using some form of eval, but here you can just use define_singleton_method instead:
class TestingSingletonMethodsWithVariable
METHODS = %w(a b c d)
def initialize(favorite_method)
METHODS.each do |method_name|
if favorite_method == method_name
define_singleton_method method_name do
puts "#{method_name} its my favorite method"
end
else
define_singleton_method method_name do
puts "#{method_name} its not my favorite method"
end
end
end
end
end
t = TestingSingletonMethodsWithVariable.new('b')
t.a
t.b
t.c
t.d
Adding to Jörg's answer: define_singleton_method is Ruby 1.9+. If you want to run it in pre 1.9, the following works:
class Object
def metaclass
class << self; self; end
end
end
class TestingSingletonMethodsWithVariable
METHODS = %w(a b c d)
def initialize(favorite_method)
METHODS.each do |method_name|
if( favorite_method == method_name )
metaclass.send(:define_method, method_name, Proc.new do
puts "#{method_name} its my favorite method"
end)
else
metaclass.send(:define_method, method_name, Proc.new do
puts "#{method_name} its not my favorite method"
end)
end
end
end
end
t = TestingSingletonMethodsWithVariable.new('b')
t.a
t.b
t.c
t.d
Related
How to define an original name scope in module/class with Ruby
I want to implement class like the following:
module SomeModule
extend OriginalNameScope
scope(:some) do
def method1
puts 1
end
def method2
puts 2
end
end
end
class SomeClass
include SomeModule
end
c = SomeClass.new
# I want to call methods like the following:
c.some_method1
c.some_method2
How to implement the OriginalNameScope module? I found out to get the method definitions in this method, but I don't know how to redefine methods with a prefix scope.
module OriginalNameScope
def scope(name, &method_definition)
puts method_definition.class
# => Proc
end
end
This is actually just a combination of some simple standard Ruby metaprogramming patterns and idioms:
module OriginalNameScope
def scope(name)
singleton_class.prepend(Module.new do
define_method(:method_added) do |meth|
if name && !#__recursion_guard__
#__recursion_guard__ = meth
method = instance_method(meth)
undef_method(meth)
define_method(:"#{name}_#{meth}") do |*args, &block|
method.bind(self).(*args, &block)
end
end
#__recursion_guard__ = nil
super(meth)
end
end)
yield
end
end
I just slapped this together, there's probably a lot that can be improved (e.g. use Refinements) and simplified.
It's possible to create a Complex number in Ruby using
c = Complex.new(1,2)
but, it can be shortened to
c = Complex(1,2)
Is it possible to achieve the same functionality without having to define a function outside the class, like in the example below?
class Bits
def initialize(bits)
#bits = bits
end
end
def Bits(list) # I would like to define this function inside the class
Bits.new list
end
b = Bits([0,1])
I think Ruby should allow at least one of the proposed constructors below
class Bits
def initialize(bits)
#bits = bits
end
def self.Bits(list) # version 1
new list
end
def Bits(list) # version 2
new list
end
def Bits.Bits(list) # version 3
new list
end
end
Have this snippet:
def make_light_constructor(klass)
eval("def #{klass}(*args) #{klass}.new(*args) end")
end
Now you can do this:
class Test
make_light_constructor(Test)
def initialize(x,y)
print x + y
end
end
t = Test(5,3)
Yes, I know you're still defining a function outside a class - but it is only one function, and now any class you want can make use of its implementation rather than making one function per class.
c = Complex(1,2)
is actually calling a method on Kernel
Basically you can't - the () operator cannot be overriden in Ruby (Complex class is written in C).
You could achieve something similar using []:
class Bits
def self.[](list)
Bits.new list
end
end
Which would allow something like:
b = Bits[[1,2]]
If you pack your classes into some module you can use 2 methods:
self.included - called when you include Mod
self.extend - called when you extend Mod
I have created very basic method using self.included.
Cons: It is hard to write. You can say it is complex; It may not contain all features.
Pros: It looks exactly like Complex(2,3) (it uses () instead of [] as in https://stackoverflow.com/a/24351316/2597260 answer); You create just initialize, self.included create the rest.
module M1
# some random classes
class A; end
class B
def initialize list
#list = list
end
attr_accessor :list
end
class C
def initialize var1
#var1 = var1
end
attr_accessor :var1
end
Answer = 42
# called on `include module_name`
def self.included mod
# classes are constants (in normal cases)
constants.each do |cons|
class_eval do
# I don't like hard-coded `::M1`
klass = ::M1.const_get cons
if klass.class==Class
define_method cons do |*args, &block|
klass.new *args, &block
end
end
end
end
end
end
include M1
p A()
b = B([1,2,3])
p b.list
c = C 42
p c.var1
puts Answer()
# NoMethodError: undefined method `Answer' for main:Object
# thats good, because Answer is not a class!
Here's another hack that you could (but shouldn't) use, inspired by this blog post:
def method_missing(sym, *args, **kwargs, &blk)
Object.const_get(sym).new(*args, **kwargs, &blk)
end
This simply expects any unknown method name to be the name of a class and calls :new on the class.
With rudimentary error handling:
alias sys_method_missing method_missing
def method_missing(sym, *args, **kwargs, &blk)
cls = Object.const_get(sym) if Object.constants.include? sym
if cls.is_a?(Class) then cls.new(*args, **kwargs, &blk)
else sys_method_missing(sym, *args, **kwargs, &blk) end
end
If an unknown method name is the name of a class, this calls :new on the class. Otherwise, it delegates the call to the original implementation of method_missing().
Usage:
class Foo
end
foo = Foo()
p foo
Result:
#<Foo:0x00007f8fe0877180>
I want to call instance_eval on this class:
class A
attr_reader :att
end
passing this method b:
class B
def b(*args)
att
end
end
but this is happening:
a = A.new
bb = B.new
a.instance_eval(&bb.method(:b)) # NameError: undefined local variable or method `att' for #<B:0x007fb39ad0d568>
When b is a block it works, but b as a method isn't working. How can I make it work?
It's not clear exactly what you goal is. You can easily share methods between classes by defining them in a module and including the module in each class
module ABCommon
def a
'a'
end
end
class A
include ABCommon
end
Anything = Hash
class B < Anything
include ABCommon
def b(*args)
a
end
def run
puts b
end
end
This answer does not use a real method as asked, but I didn't need to return a Proc or change A. This is a DSL, def_b should have a meaningful name to the domain, like configure, and it is more likely to be defined in a module or base class.
class B
class << self
def def_b(&block)
(#b_blocks ||= []) << block
end
def run
return if #b_blocks.nil?
a = A.new
#b_blocks.each { |block| a.instance_eval(&block) }
end
end
def_b do
a
end
end
And it accepts multiple definitions. It could be made accept only a single definition like this:
class B
class << self
def def_b(&block)
raise "b defined twice!" unless #b_block.nil?
#b_block = block
end
def run
A.new.instance_eval(&#b_block) unless #b_block.nil?
end
end
def_b do
a
end
end
I have a code
class A < BasicObject
def initialize var1, *args, &block
if var1 == :lambda
#var1 = lambda &block
end
end
end
a = A.new :lambda, 123 do |var|
puts "ha ha ha"
end
why does it cause an error?
undefined method `lambda' for #<A:0x00000001687968> (NoMethodError)
unlike this one (it doesn't cause it)
class A
def initialize var1, *args, &block
if var1 == :lambda
#var1 = lambda &block
end
end
end
The lambda method is defined in the Kernel module. Object includes Kernel. BasicObject does not. So if you want to use lambda from a BasicObject, you have to call it as ::Kernel.lambda.
Note that this is not specific to lambda - it applies to any other Kernel method (like e.g. puts) as well.
PS: Note that #var1 = lambda &block does the same thing as just writing #var1 = block, so the use of lambda isn't actually necessary here.
You are using BasicObject as base class which is an explicit Blank class and specifically does not include Kernel, so you need the qualifier ::Kernel when you access any Kernel method.
On a separate note -
Instead of passing an argument that you have a block you can use the Kernel method block_given?
So taking your example -
class A
def initialize *args, &block
if block_given?
#var1 = lambda &block
end
puts #var1.call
end
end
a = A.new 123 do |var|
puts "ha ha ha"
end
I want to define a set of methods that can be added to a class (C in the example) using a Mixin. These methods can be defined by any class that inherits from another class (A in the example) and should be able to call methods in the receiver instance (C instance).
I have this snippet of code:
M = Module.new
class A
class << self
def init(method)
if block_given?
M.send(:define_method, method) do
instance_exec &Proc.new
end
else
block = self.method(method).to_proc
M.send(:define_method, method) do
yield block.call
end
end
end
end
end
class B < A
init(:foo) do
"foo+".concat(c_method)
end
def self.bar
"bar+".concat(c_method)
end
init(:bar)
end
C = Class.new do
def c_method
"c_method"
end
end
c = C.new
c.extend(M)
puts c.foo
puts c.bar
Adding methods using blocks works, but last line fails :(
foo+c_method
test.rb:28:in `bar': undefined local variable or method `c_method' for B:Class (NameError)
from test.rb:15:in `call'
from test.rb:15:in `block in init'
from test.rb:46:in `<main>'
What I'm doing wrong? Or this makes no sense?
Thanks
Juan
When you prepare instance_exec &Proc.new inside if statement, this statement is executed within instance of C class as context. You can verify this by adding puts self inside block for init(:foo).
On the other hand, when you call yield block.call you yield thread execution into context of B class object (not to instance of this class, of course :) ). This place of your code doesn't know anything about C::c_method and this is cause of error.
It seems that what I'm trying to do is to unbind the method :bar from B and bind to C, what it's not allowed. You can find more info in this great post
M = Module.new
class A
class << self
def init(method)
if block_given?
M.send(:define_method, method) do
instance_exec &Proc.new
end
else
block = self.method(method).unbind
M.send(:define_method, method) do
m = block.bind(self)
puts m
end
end
end
end
end
class B < A
init(:foo) do
"foo+".concat(c_method)
end
def self.bar
"bar+".concat(c_method)
end
init(:bar)
end
C = Class.new do
def c_method
"c_method"
end
end
c = C.new
c.extend(M)
puts c.foo
puts c.bar
foo+c_method
test.rb:16:in `bind': singleton method called for a different object (TypeError)
from test.rb:16:in `block in init'
from test.rb:48:in `<main>'