(Big edit, I got part of the way there…)
I've been hacking away and I've come up with this as a way to specify things that need to be done before attributes are read:
class Class
def attr_reader(*params)
if block_given?
params.each do |sym|
define_method(sym) do
yield
self.instance_variable_get("##{sym}")
end
end
else
params.each do |sym|
attr sym
end
end
end
end
class Test
attr_reader :normal
attr_reader(:jp,:nope) { changethings if #nope.nil? }
def initialize
#normal = "Normal"
#jp = "JP"
#done = false
end
def changethings
p "doing"
#jp = "Haha!"
#nope = "poop"
end
end
j = Test.new
p j.normal
p j.jp
But changethings isn't being recognised as a method — anyone got any ideas?
You need to evaluate the block in the context of the instance. yield by default will evaluate it in its native context.
class Class
def attr_reader(*params, &blk)
if block_given?
params.each do |sym|
define_method(sym) do
self.instance_eval(&blk)
self.instance_variable_get("##{sym}")
end
end
else
params.each do |sym|
attr sym
end
end
end
end
Here's another alternative approach you can look at. It's not as elegant as what you're trying to do using define_method but it's maybe worth looking at.
Add a new method lazy_attr_reader to Class
class Class
def lazy_attr_reader(*vars)
options = vars.last.is_a?(::Hash) ? vars.pop : {}
# get the name of the method that will populate the attribute from options
# default to 'get_things'
init_method = options[:via] || 'get_things'
vars.each do |var|
class_eval("def #{var}; #{init_method} if !defined? ##{var}; ##{var}; end")
end
end
end
Then use it like this:
class Test
lazy_attr_reader :name, :via => "name_loader"
def name_loader
#name = "Bob"
end
end
In action:
irb(main):145:0> t = Test.new
=> #<Test:0x2d6291c>
irb(main):146:0> t.name
=> "Bob"
IMHO changing the context of the block is pretty counter-intuitive, from a perspective of someone who would use such attr_reader on steroids.
Perhaps you should consider plain ol' "specify method name using optional arguments" approach:
def lazy_attr_reader(*args, params)
args.each do |e|
define_method(e) do
send(params[:init]) if params[:init] && !instance_variable_get("##{e}")
instance_variable_get("##{e}")
end
end
end
class Foo
lazy_attr_reader :foo, :bar, :init => :load
def load
#foo = 'foo'
#bar = 'bar'
end
end
f = Foo.new
puts f.bar
#=> bar
Related
I'm working to create a few Ruby builder objects, and thinking on how I could reuse some of Ruby's magic to reduce the logic of the builder to a single class/module. It's been ~10 years since my last dance with the language, so a bit rusty.
For example, I have this builder:
class Person
PROPERTIES = [:name, :age]
attr_accessor(*PROPERTIES)
def initialize(**kwargs)
kwargs.each do |k, v|
self.send("#{k}=", v) if self.respond_to?(k)
end
end
def build
output = {}
PROPERTIES.each do |prop|
if self.respond_to?(prop) and !self.send(prop).nil?
value = self.send(prop)
# if value itself is a builder, evalute it
output[prop] = value.respond_to?(:build) ? value.build : value
end
end
output
end
def method_missing(m, *args, &block)
if m.to_s.start_with?("set_")
mm = m.to_s.gsub("set_", "")
if PROPERTIES.include?(mm.to_sym)
self.send("#{mm}=", *args)
return self
end
end
end
end
Which can be used like so:
Person.new(name: "Joe").set_age(30).build
# => {name: "Joe", age: 30}
I would like to be able to refactor everything to a class and/or module so that I could create multiple such builders that'll only need to define attributes and inherit or include the rest (and possibly extend each other).
class BuilderBase
# define all/most relevant methods here for initialization,
# builder attributes and object construction
end
module BuilderHelper
# possibly throw some of the methods here for better scope access
end
class Person < BuilderBase
include BuilderHelper
PROPERTIES = [:name, :age, :email, :address]
attr_accessor(*PROPERTIES)
end
# Person.new(name: "Joe").set_age(30).set_email("joe#mail.com").set_address("NYC").build
class Server < BuilderBase
include BuilderHelper
PROPERTIES = [:cpu, :memory, :disk_space]
attr_accessor(*PROPERTIES)
end
# Server.new.set_cpu("i9").set_memory("32GB").set_disk_space("1TB").build
I've been able to get this far:
class BuilderBase
def initialize(**kwargs)
kwargs.each do |k, v|
self.send("#{k}=", v) if self.respond_to?(k)
end
end
end
class Person < BuilderBase
PROPERTIES = [:name, :age]
attr_accessor(*PROPERTIES)
def build
...
end
def method_missing(m, *args, &block)
...
end
end
Trying to extract method_missing and build into the base class or a module keeps throwing an error at me saying something like:
NameError: uninitialized constant BuilderHelper::PROPERTIES
OR
NameError: uninitialized constant BuilderBase::PROPERTIES
Essentially the neither the parent class nor the mixin are able to access the child class' attributes. For the parent this makes sense, but not sure why the mixin can't read the values inside the class it was included into. This being Ruby I'm sure there's some magical way to do this that I have missed.
Help appreciated - thanks!
I reduced your sample to the required parts and came up with:
module Mixin
def say_mixin
puts "Mixin: Value defined in #{self.class::VALUE}"
end
end
class Parent
def say_parent
puts "Parent: Value defined in #{self.class::VALUE}"
end
end
class Child < Parent
include Mixin
VALUE = "CHILD"
end
child = Child.new
child.say_mixin
child.say_parent
This is how you could access a CONSTANT that lives in the child/including class from the parent/included class.
But I don't see why you want to have this whole Builder thing in the first place. Would an OpenStruct not work for your case?
Interesting question. As mentioned by #Pascal, an OpenStruct might already do what you're looking for.
Still, it might be more concise to explicitly define the setter methods. It might also be clearer to replace the PROPERTIES constants by methods calls. And since I'd expect a build method to return a complete object and not just a Hash, I renamed it to to_h:
class BuilderBase
def self.properties(*ps)
ps.each do |property|
attr_reader property
define_method :"set_#{property}" do |value|
instance_variable_set(:"##{property}", value)
#hash[property] = value
self
end
end
end
def initialize(**kwargs)
#hash = {}
kwargs.each do |k, v|
self.send("set_#{k}", v) if self.respond_to?(k)
end
end
def to_h
#hash
end
end
class Person < BuilderBase
properties :name, :age, :email, :address
end
p Person.new(name: "Joe").set_age(30).set_email("joe#mail.com").set_address("NYC").to_h
# {:name=>"Joe", :age=>30, :email=>"joe#mail.com", :address=>"NYC"}
class Server < BuilderBase
properties :cpu, :memory, :disk_space
end
p Server.new.set_cpu("i9").set_memory("32GB").set_disk_space("1TB").to_h
# {:cpu=>"i9", :memory=>"32GB", :disk_space=>"1TB"}
I think no need to declare PROPERTIES, we can create a general builder like this:
class Builder
attr_reader :build
def initialize(clazz)
#build = clazz.new
end
def self.build(clazz, &block)
builder = Builder.new(clazz)
builder.instance_eval(&block)
builder.build
end
def set(attr, val)
#build.send("#{attr}=", val)
self
end
def method_missing(m, *args, &block)
if #build.respond_to?("#{m}=")
set(m, *args)
else
#build.send("#{m}", *args, &block)
end
self
end
def respond_to_missing?(method_name, include_private = false)
#build.respond_to?(method_name) || super
end
end
Using
class Test
attr_accessor :x, :y, :z
attr_reader :w, :u, :v
def set_w(val)
#w = val&.even? ? val : 0
end
def add_u(val)
#u = val if val&.odd?
end
end
test1 = Builder.build(Test) {
x 1
y 2
z 3
} # <Test:0x000055b6b0fb2888 #x=1, #y=2, #z=3>
test2 = Builder.new(Test).set(:x, 1988).set_w(6).add_u(2).build
# <Test:0x000055b6b0fb23b0 #x=1988, #w=6>
Let see the code first that will help what I want to achieve:
class PostalInfo
attr_reader :name, :code
def initialize (id, name, code)
#id = id
#name = name
#code = code
end
def method_missing(method, *args, &blk)
if method.to_s == "#{name}"
return code
else
super
end
end
end
pi1 = PostalInfo.new(1, 'united_states', 'US')
pi2 = PostalInfo.new(2, 'united_kingdom', 'UK')
So when I run below code, it gives output as:
pi1.united_states => 'US'
pi2.united_kingdom => 'UK'
its fine upto here, but I also want to do something like
PostalInfo.united_states => 'US'
PostalInfo.united_kingdom => 'UK'
how to do that, thanks in advance
This sets up a class attribute to hold the data, and whenever an instance is initialized, it adds to that data structure, and uses a similar class-level method_missing.
class PostalInfo
attr_reader :name, :code
##postal_info = {}
def self.method_missing(method, *args, &blk)
name = method.to_s
if ##postal_info[name]
##postal_info[name]
else
super
end
end
def initialize (id, name, code)
#id = id
#name = name
#code = code
##postal_info[#name] = #code
end
def method_missing(method, *args, &blk)
if method.to_s == "#{name}"
return code
else
super
end
end
end
pi1 = PostalInfo.new(1, 'united_states', 'US')
pi2 = PostalInfo.new(2, 'united_kingdom', 'UK')
PostalInfo.united_states #=> 'US'
PostalInfo.united_kingdom #=> 'UK'
I will say, this seems like a weird design, and I'd normally recommend avoiding using mutable state with class methods, and method_missing wherever possible.
You can write something like this:
class PostalInfo
POSTAL_HASH = {
united_states: 'US',
united_kingdom: 'UK',
}.freeze
def self.method_missing(method, *args, &blk)
POSTAL_HASH[method] || super
end
end
Skipping missing method might result in better performance:
class PostalInfo
POSTAL_HASH = {
united_states: 'US',
united_kingdom: 'UK',
}.freeze
class << self
POSTAL_HASH.each do |name, code|
define_method(name) do
code
end
end
end
end
With one exception, you need to mimic the code in the first part of your answer in the class' singleton class. The difference concerns the initialisation of the instance variables. Rather than using PostalInfo::new and PostalInfo#initialize, you need to create a class method for doing that (which I've called add_country_data). Note that as the class' instance variable id is not used I've not included it in the code.
class PostalInfo
class << self
attr_reader :country_data
def add_country_data(name, code)
(#country_data ||= {})[name] = code
end
def add_country_data(name, code)
#country_data[name] = code
end
def method_missing(method, *args, &blk)
return country_data[method.to_s] if country_data.key?(method.to_s)
super
end
end
end
PostalInfo.add_country_data('united_states', 'US')
PostalInfo.add_country_data('united_kingdom', 'UK')
PostalInfo.united_states
#=> "US"
PostalInfo.united_kingdom
#=> "UK"
PostalInfo.france
#=> NoMethodError (undefined method `france' for PostalInfo:Class)
Though this meets your requirement, I would be inclined to construct the class in a more conventional way:
class PostalInfo
attr_reader :name, :code
#instances = []
def initialize(name, code)
#name = name
#code = code
self.class.instances << self
end
singleton_class.public_send(:attr_reader, :instances)
end
us = PostalInfo.new('united_states', 'US')
uk = PostalInfo.new('united_kingdom', 'UK')
us.code
#=> "US"
uk.code
#=> "UK"
PostalInfo.instances
#=> [#<PostalInfo:0x00005c1f24c5ccf0 #name="united_states", #code="US">,
# #<PostalInfo:0x00005c1f24c71858 #name="united_kingdom", #code="UK">]
There is the following code:
class MyOpenStruct
def initialize(initial_values = {})
#values = initial_values
end
def _singleton_class
class << self
self
end
end
def method_missing(name, *args, &block)
if name[-1] == "="
base_name = name[0..-2].intern
puts "add_method_to_set"
self.class.add_method_to_set(base_name)
#values[base_name] = args[0]
else
puts "add_method_to_get"
self.class.add_method_to_get(base_name)
#values[name]
end
end
def self.add_method_to_get(name)
define_method(name) do |value|
#values[name]
end
end
def self.add_method_to_set(name)
define_method(name) do |value|
#values[name] = value
end
end
end
obj1 = MyOpenStruct.new(name: "Dave")
obj1.address = "1"
obj2 = MyOpenStruct.new(name: "Dave")
obj2.address = "2"
I want to do the following thing: when I execute some method (obj1.address) and it's missing I want to add this method to my MyOpenStruct class. But when I execute my code I get 'missing' two times instead of one. Why? I don't understand. Please explain it to me. Thanks.
#koffeinfrei identified one problem with you code, but I found a few others. Below I have what I believe to be a corrected version. I have also suggested an alternative way to structure the code. My main advice is to pull out the dynamic creation of instance methods, as that is quite generic. You might even put that in a module with other methods that you could include as needed.
Your code with repairs
class MyOpenStruct
def initialize(initial_values = {})
#values = initial_values
end
def method_missing(name, *args, &block)
puts "in mm, name = #{name}"
if name[-1] == "="
base_name = name[/\w+/]
puts "add_method_to_set: '#{name}'"
self.class.add_method_to_set(base_name)
#values[base_name.to_sym] = args[0]
else
puts "add_method_to_get: '#{name}'"
self.class.add_method_to_get(name)
#values[name.to_sym]
end
end
def self.add_method_to_get(name)
define_method(name.to_sym) do
#values[name.to_sym]
end
end
def self.add_method_to_set(name)
define_method((name+'=').to_sym) do |value|
#values[name.to_sym] = value
end
end
end
Alternative construction
def create_instance_eval(klass, method, &block)
klass.class_eval { define_method(method, &block) }
end
class MyOpenStruct
def initialize(initial_values = {})
#values = initial_values
end
def method_missing(name, *args, &block)
if name[-1] == "="
base_name = name[/\w+/]
method_name = (base_name+'=').to_sym
puts "create method '#{method_name}'"
method = create_instance_eval(self.class, method_name) do |value|
#values[base_name.to_sym] = value
end
send(method, args[0])
else
method_name = name.to_sym
puts "create method '#{method_name}'"
method = create_instance_eval(self.class, method_name) do
#values[method_name]
end
send(method)
end
end
end
Example
MyOpenStruct.instance_methods(false)
#=> [:method_missing]
obj1 = MyOpenStruct.new(name: "Dave")
#=> #<MyOpenStruct:0x00000102805b58 #values={:name=>"Dave"}>
obj1.address = "1"
# create method 'address='
#=> "1"
MyOpenStruct.instance_methods(false)
#=> [:method_missing, :address=]
obj2 = MyOpenStruct.new(name: "Mitzy")
#=> #<MyOpenStruct:0x00000101848878 #values={:name=>"Mitzy"}>
obj2.address = 2
#=> 2
obj2.address
# create method 'address'
# => 2
MyOpenStruct.instance_methods(false)
$#=> [:method_missing, :address=, :address]
obj1.instance_variable_get(:#values)
#=> {:name=>"Dave", :address=>"1"}
obj2.instance_variable_get(:#values)
#=> {:name=>"Mitzy", :address=>2}
The method name for the setter method needs to have the trailing =, so you need to define the method with the name instead of the base_name.
self.class.add_method_to_set(name)
I tried to to extend the code from this question for keeping records of an attribute value. However, my code fails in the case of more than one attributes. Here is the code:
class Class
def attr_accessor_with_history(attr_name)
attr_name = attr_name.to_s
attr_reader attr_name
ah=attr_name+"_history"
attr_reader ah
class_eval %Q{
def #{attr_name}= (attr_name)
#attr_name=attr_name
if #ah == nil
#ah=[nil]
end
#ah.push(attr_name)
end
def #{ah}
#ah
end
def #{attr_name}
#attr_name
end
}
end
end
Here a dummy class for testing
class Foo
attr_accessor_with_history :bar
attr_accessor_with_history :bar1
end
f = Foo.new
f.bar = 1
f.bar = 2
f.bar1 = 5
p f.bar_history
p f.bar1_history
For some reason, f.bar and f.bar1 both return 5 and f.bar_history = f.bar1_history = [nil, 1, 2, 5]. Any idea why that is?
You were using #ah and #attr_name instead of ##{ah} and ##{attr_name} when getting/setting in the methods. This meant that they were always setting and returning the same instance variable, instead of different, dynamically named ones.
class Class
def attr_accessor_with_history(attr_name)
class_eval %{
attr_reader :#{attr_name}, :#{attr_name}_history
def #{attr_name}=(value)
##{attr_name} = value
##{attr_name}_history ||= [nil]
##{attr_name}_history << value
end
}
end
end
I've also generally cleaned up your code a little to make it (I think) clearer and more concise.
I'm trying to make a method similar to attr_reader but I can't seem to get the instance of the class that the method gets called in.
class Module
def modifiable_reader(*symbols)
# Right here is where it returns Klass instead of #<Klass:0x1df25e0 #readable="this">
mod = self
variables = symbols.collect { |sym| ("#" << sym.to_s).to_sym }
attr_reader *symbols
(class << ModifyMethods; self; end).instance_eval do
define_method(*symbols) do
mod.instance_variable_get(*variables)
end
end
end
end
class Object
module ModifyMethods; end
def modify(&block)
ModifyMethods.instance_eval(&block)
end
end
class Klass
modifiable_reader :readable
def initialize
#readable = "this"
end
end
my_klass = Klass.new
my_klass.modify do
puts "Readable: " << readable.to_s
end
I'm not sure what it is you're trying to do.
If it helps, the spell for attr_reader is something like this:
#!/usr/bin/ruby1.8
module Kernel
def my_attr_reader(symbol)
eval <<-EOS
def #{symbol}
##{symbol}
end
EOS
end
end
class Foo
my_attr_reader :foo
def initialize
#foo = 'foo'
end
end
p Foo.new.foo # => "foo"
What I can understand from your code is that you want to have the modify block to respond to the instance methods of Klass, that's as simple as:
class Klass
attr_reader :modifiable
alias_method :modify, :instance_eval
def initialize(m)
#modifiable = m
end
end
Klass.new('john').modify do
puts 'Readable %s' % modifiable
end
About this tidbit of code:
def modifiable_reader(*symbols)
# Right here is where it returns Klass instead of #<Klass:0x1df25e0 #readable="this">
mod = self
...
Probably this can give you a hint of what is going on:
Class.superclass # => Module
Klass.instance_of?(Class) # => true
Klass = Class.new do
def hello
'hello'
end
end
Klass.new.hello # => 'hello'
When you are adding methods to the Module class, you are also adding methods to the Class class, which will add an instance method to instances of Class (in this case your class Klass), at the end this means you are adding class methods on your Klass class