So I'm writing some rspec tests and I'm embarrassed at my lack of Ruby understanding.
I have a file structure that looks like the following:
GUI_Tests/Tests/test_spec.rb
GUI_Tests/windows_gui.rb
GUI_Tests/upload_tool.rb
when I run spec for the test_spec.rb file, I require the upload_tool file to be included like so:
spec -r ../upload_tool -fs test_spec.rb
Then, the upload_tool requires windows_gui.rb, like so:
require '../windows_gui'
My question is, why so I have to reference windows_gui.rb relative to test_spec.rb (requiring the ../) rather than the upload_tool.rb? This feels wrong to me, I'll want to use the upload_tool.rb out of context of the test specs, which means changing the requires each time.
Clearly I'm missing something, but if I don't reference relative to the test spec I get a file not found error.
Sorry for being so ignorant here, but I'm coming up empty handed. Any thoughts appreciated.
BB
You don't. requires are relative to the current directory, which in your case was GUI_Tests/Tests. If you did this instead:
cd ..
spec -r upload_tool -fs Test/test_spec.rb
You would have to use this:
require 'windows_gui' # without '../'
The most common way to get around that problem is using File.dirname(__FILE__):
require File.join(File.dirname(__FILE__), '..', 'windows_gui')
NOTE: in Ruby 1.9.2 require changed it's defaults: Ruby: require vs require_relative - best practice to workaround running in both Ruby <1.9.2 and >=1.9.2
Related
I want to require a file called config.rb in a different ruby file called basics.rb. I'm using Sinatra as my web framework. I'm sure there's a way to do this, I just can't find anything in the docs.
Hopefully it would look something like
post '/' do
require 'config.rb'
// logic
end
If config.rb is in your load path, you can require it at the top of your basics.rb file with require 'config'. If it is not in your load path, you'll need something like require '/path/to/your/config'.
The code you've posted will require the file. But only when someone POSTs to '/'.
Also, it's normal to omit the .rb extension when requiring ruby files. But you can include it if you like.
You can view your load path by inspecting the global variable $LOAD_PATH. From the command line ruby -e 'puts $LOAD_PATH' will print it for your version of ruby. You can also add directories to your load path.
I've one file, main.rb with the following content:
require "tokenizer.rb"
The tokenizer.rb file is in the same directory and its content is:
class Tokenizer
def self.tokenize(string)
return string.split(" ")
end
end
If i try to run main.rb I get the following error:
C:\Documents and Settings\my\src\folder>ruby main.rb
C:/Ruby193/lib/ruby/1.9.1/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in `require': cannot load such file -- tokenizer.rb (LoadError)
from C:/Ruby193/lib/ruby/1.9.1/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in `require '
from main.rb:1:in `<main>'
I just noticed that if I use load instead of require everything works fine. What may the problem be here?
I just tried and it works with require "./tokenizer".
Just do this:
require_relative 'tokenizer'
If you put this in a Ruby file that is in the same directory as tokenizer.rb, it will work fine no matter what your current working directory (CWD) is.
Explanation of why this is the best way
The other answers claim you should use require './tokenizer', but that is the wrong answer, because it will only work if you run your Ruby process in the same directory that tokenizer.rb is in. Pretty much the only reason to consider using require like that would be if you need to support Ruby 1.8, which doesn't have require_relative.
The require './tokenizer' answer might work for you today, but it unnecessarily limits the ways in which you can run your Ruby code. Tomorrow, if you want to move your files to a different directory, or just want to start your Ruby process from a different directory, you'll have to rethink all of those require statements.
Using require to access files that are on the load path is a fine thing and Ruby gems do it all the time. But you shouldn't start the argument to require with a . unless you are doing something very special and know what you are doing.
When you write code that makes assumptions about its environment, you should think carefully about what assumptions to make. In this case, there are up to three different ways to require the tokenizer file, and each makes a different assumption:
require_relative 'path/to/tokenizer': Assumes that the relative path between the two Ruby source files will stay the same.
require 'path/to/tokenizer': Assumes that path/to/tokenizer is inside one of the directories on the load path ($LOAD_PATH). This generally requires extra setup, since you have to add something to the load path.
require './path/to/tokenizer': Assumes that the relative path from the Ruby process's current working directory to tokenizer.rb is going to stay the same.
I think that for most people and most situations, the assumptions made in options #1 and #2 are more likely to hold true over time.
Ruby 1.9 has removed the current directory from the load path, and so you will need to do a relative require on this file, as David Grayson says:
require_relative 'tokenizer'
There's no need to suffix it with .rb, as Ruby's smart enough to know that's what you mean anyway.
require loads a file from the $LOAD_PATH. If you want to require a file relative to the currently executing file instead of from the $LOAD_PATH, use require_relative.
I would recommend,
load './tokenizer.rb'
Given, that you know the file is in the same working directory.
If you're trying to require it relative to the file, you can use
require_relative 'tokenizer'
I hope this helps.
Another nice little method is to include the current directory in your load path with
$:.unshift('.')
You could push it onto the $: ($LOAD_PATH) array but unshift will force it to load your current working directory before the rest of the load path.
Once you've added your current directory in your load path you don't need to keep specifying
require './tokenizer'
and can just go back to using
require 'tokenizer'
This will work nicely if it is in a gem lib directory and this is the tokenizer.rb
require_relative 'tokenizer/main'
For those who are absolutely sure their relative path is correct, my problem was that my files did not have the .rb extension! (Even though I used RubyMine to create the files and selected that they were Ruby files on creation.)
Double check the file extensions on your file!
What about including the current directory in the search path?
ruby -I. main.rb
I used jruby-1.7.4 to compile my ruby code.
require 'roman-numerals.rb'
is the code which threw the below error.
LoadError: no such file to load -- roman-numerals
require at org/jruby/RubyKernel.java:1054
require at /Users/amanoharan/.rvm/rubies/jruby-1.7.4/lib/ruby/shared/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36
(root) at /Users/amanoharan/Documents/Aptana Studio 3 Workspace/RubyApplication/RubyApplication1/Ruby2.rb:2
I removed rb from require and gave
require 'roman-numerals'
It worked fine.
The problem is that require does not load from the current directory. This is what I thought, too but then I found this thread. For example I tried the following code:
irb> f = File.new('blabla.rb')
=> #<File:blabla.rb>
irb> f.read
=> "class Tokenizer\n def self.tokenize(string)\n return string.split(
\" \")\n end\nend\n"
irb> require f
LoadError: cannot load such file -- blabla.rb
from D:/dev/Ruby193/lib/ruby/1.9.1/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in `req
uire'
from D:/dev/Ruby193/lib/ruby/1.9.1/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in `req
uire'
from (irb):24
from D:/dev/Ruby193/bin/irb:12:in `<main>'
As it can be seen it read the file ok, but I could not require it (the path was not recognized). and here goes code that works:
irb f = File.new('D://blabla.rb')
=> #<File:D://blabla.rb>
irb f.read
=> "class Tokenizer\n def self.tokenize(string)\n return string.split(
\" \")\n end\nend\n"
irb> require f
=> true
As you can see if you specify the full path the file loads correctly.
First :
$ sudo gem install colored2
And,you should input your password
Then :
$ sudo gem update --system
Appear
Updating rubygems-update
ERROR: While executing gem ... (OpenSSL::SSL::SSLError)
hostname "gems.ruby-china.org" does not match the server certificate
Then:
$ rvm -v
$ rvm get head
Last
What language do you want to use?? [ Swift / ObjC ]
ObjC
Would you like to include a demo application with your library? [ Yes / No ]
Yes
Which testing frameworks will you use? [ Specta / Kiwi / None ]
None
Would you like to do view based testing? [ Yes / No ]
No
What is your class prefix?
XMG
Running pod install on your new library.
you need to give the path.
Atleast you should give the path from the current directory. It will work for sure.
./filename
What is the difference between require_relative and require in Ruby?
Just look at the docs:
require_relative complements the builtin method require by allowing you to load a file that is relative to the file containing the require_relative statement.
For example, if you have unit test classes in the "test" directory, and data for them under the test "test/data" directory, then you might use a line like this in a test case:
require_relative "data/customer_data_1"
require_relative is a convenient subset of require
require_relative('path')
equals:
require(File.expand_path('path', File.dirname(__FILE__)))
if __FILE__ is defined, or it raises LoadError otherwise.
This implies that:
require_relative 'a' and require_relative './a' require relative to the current file (__FILE__).
This is what you want to use when requiring inside your library, since you don't want the result to depend on the current directory of the caller.
eval('require_relative("a.rb")') raises LoadError because __FILE__ is not defined inside eval.
This is why you can't use require_relative in RSpec tests, which get evaled.
The following operations are only possible with require:
require './a.rb' requires relative to the current directory
require 'a.rb' uses the search path ($LOAD_PATH) to require. It does not find files relative to current directory or path.
This is not possible with require_relative because the docs say that path search only happens when "the filename does not resolve to an absolute path" (i.e. starts with / or ./ or ../), which is always the case for File.expand_path.
The following operation is possible with both, but you will want to use require as it is shorter and more efficient:
require '/a.rb' and require_relative '/a.rb' both require the absolute path.
Reading the source
When the docs are not clear, I recommend that you take a look at the sources (toggle source in the docs). In some cases, it helps to understand what is going on.
require:
VALUE rb_f_require(VALUE obj, VALUE fname) {
return rb_require_safe(fname, rb_safe_level());
}
require_relative:
VALUE rb_f_require_relative(VALUE obj, VALUE fname) {
VALUE base = rb_current_realfilepath();
if (NIL_P(base)) {
rb_loaderror("cannot infer basepath");
}
base = rb_file_dirname(base);
return rb_require_safe(rb_file_absolute_path(fname, base), rb_safe_level());
}
This allows us to conclude that
require_relative('path')
is the same as:
require(File.expand_path('path', File.dirname(__FILE__)))
because:
rb_file_absolute_path =~ File.expand_path
rb_file_dirname1 =~ File.dirname
rb_current_realfilepath =~ __FILE__
Summary
Use require for installed gems
Use require_relative for local files
require uses your $LOAD_PATH to find the files.
require_relative uses the current location of the file using the statement
require
Require relies on you having installed (e.g. gem install [package]) a package somewhere on your system for that functionality.
When using require you can use the "./" format for a file in the current directory, e.g. require "./my_file" but that is not a common or recommended practice and you should use require_relative instead.
require_relative
This simply means include the file 'relative to the location of the file with the require_relative statement'. I generally recommend that files should be "within" the current directory tree as opposed to "up", e.g. don't use
require_relative '../../../filename'
(up 3 directory levels) within the file system because that tends to create unnecessary and brittle dependencies. However in some cases if you are already 'deep' within a directory tree then "up and down" another directory tree branch may be necessary. More simply perhaps, don't use require_relative for files outside of this repository (assuming you are using git which is largely a de-facto standard at this point, late 2018).
Note that require_relative uses the current directory of the file with the require_relative statement (so not necessarily your current directory that you are using the command from). This keeps the require_relative path "stable" as it always be relative to the file requiring it in the same way.
From Ruby API:
require_relative complements the
builtin method require by allowing you
to load a file that is relative to the
file containing the require_relative
statement.
When you use require to load a file,
you are usually accessing
functionality that has been properly
installed, and made accessible, in
your system. require does not offer a
good solution for loading files within
the project’s code. This may be useful
during a development phase, for
accessing test data, or even for
accessing files that are "locked" away
inside a project, not intended for
outside use.
For example, if you have unit test
classes in the "test" directory, and
data for them under the test
"test/data" directory, then you might
use a line like this in a test case:
require_relative "data/customer_data_1"
Since neither
"test" nor "test/data" are likely to
be in Ruby’s library path (and for
good reason), a normal require won’t
find them. require_relative is a good
solution for this particular problem.
You may include or omit the extension
(.rb or .so) of the file you are
loading.
path must respond to to_str.
You can find the documentation at http://extensions.rubyforge.org/rdoc/classes/Kernel.html
The top answers are correct, but deeply technical. For those newer to Ruby:
require_relative will most likely be used to bring in code from another file that you wrote.
for example, what if you have data in ~/my-project/data.rb and you want to include that in ~/my-project/solution.rb? in solution.rb you would add require_relative 'data'.
it is important to note these files do not need to be in the same directory. require_relative '../../folder1/folder2/data' is also valid.
require will most likely be used to bring in code from a library someone else wrote.
for example, what if you want to use one of the helper functions provided in the active_support library? you'll need to install the gem with gem install activesupport and then in the file require 'active_support'.
require 'active_support/all'
"FooBar".underscore
Said differently--
require_relative requires a file specifically pointed to relative to the file that calls it.
require requires a file included in the $LOAD_PATH.
I just saw the RSpec's code has some comment on require_relative being O(1) constant and require being O(N) linear. So probably the difference is that require_relative is the preferred one than require.
I want to add that when using Windows you can use require './1.rb' if the script is run local or from a mapped network drive but when run from an UNC \\servername\sharename\folder path you need to use require_relative './1.rb'.
I don't mingle in the discussion which to use for other reasons.
absolute path
require './app/example_file.rb'
shortened name
require_relative 'example_file'
I have a Ruby code with different classes in a few files. In one file, I start the execution. This file requires my other files.
Is this a good way to start a ruby code?
When I run the code from a symbolic link, for example DIR2/MyRubyCode is a link to the main file DIR1/MyRubyCode.rb, then my requires will fail. I solved the problem by adding the path DIR1 to $LOAD_PATH before the require, but I think there would be much better ways to do it. Do you have any suggestions about that?
If you're using Ruby 1.9 or greater, user require_relative for your dependencies.
require_relative 'foo_class'
require_relative 'bar_module'
If you want to check if a Ruby file is being 'require'ed or executed with 'ruby MyRubyCode.rb', check the __FILE__ constant.
# If the first argument to `ruby` is this file.
if $0 == __FILE__
# Execute some stuff.
end
As far as the require/$LOAD_PATH issue, you could always use the relative path in the require statement. For example:
# MyRubyCode.rb
require "#{File.dirname(__FILE__)}/foo_class"
require "#{File.dirname(__FILE__)}/bar_module"
Which would include the foo_class.rb and bar_module.rb files in the same directory as MyRubyCode.rb.
I know this is an old question, but there is an updated answer to it, and I wanted to post it:
Starting in a more recent version of Ruby (I'm not sure when), you can require files in the same directory by using the following:
require './foo_class'
require './bar_module'
and it'll load files called foo_class.rb and bar_module.rb in the same directory.
For checking if your file is being required or ran normally, check the other answer.
What is the best way to manage the require paths in a ruby program?
Let me give a basic example, consider a structure like:
\MyProgram
\MyProgram\src\myclass.rb
\MyProgram\test\mytest.rb
If in my test i use require '../src/myclass' then I can only call the test from \MyProgram\test folder, but I want to be able to call it from any path!
The solution I came up with is to define in all source files the following line:
ROOT = "#{File.dirname(__FILE__)}/.." unless defined?(ROOT) and then always use require "#{ROOT}/src/myclass"
Is there a better way to do it?
As of Ruby 1.9 you can use require_relative to do this:
require_relative '../src/myclass'
If you need this for earlier versions you can get it from the extensions gem as per this SO comment.
Here is a slightly modified way to do it:
$LOAD_PATH.unshift File.expand_path(File.join(File.dirname(__FILE__), "..", "src"))
By prepending the path to your source to $LOAD_PATH (aka $:) you don't have to supply the root etc. explicitly when you require your code i.e. require 'myclass'
The same, less noisy IMHO:
$:.unshift File.expand_path("../../src", __FILE__)
require 'myclass'
or just
require File.expand_path "../../src/myclass", __FILE__
Tested with ruby 1.8.7 and 1.9.0 on (Debian) Linux - please tell me if it works on Windows, too.
Why a simpler method (eg. 'use', 'require_relative', or sg like this) isn't built into the standard lib? UPDATE: require_relative is there since 1.9.x
Pathname(__FILE__).dirname.realpath
provides a the absolute path in a dynamic way.
Use following code to require all "rb" files in specific folder (=> Ruby 1.9):
path='../specific_folder/' # relative path from current file to required folder
Dir[File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/'+path+'*.rb'].each do |file|
require_relative path+File.basename(file) # require all files with .rb extension in this folder
end
sris's answer is the standard approach.
Another way would be to package your code as a gem. Then rubygems will take care of making sure your library files are in your path.
This is what I ended up with - a Ruby version of a setenv shell script:
# Read application config
$hConf, $fConf = {}, File.expand_path("../config.rb", __FILE__)
$hConf = File.open($fConf) {|f| eval(f.read)} if File.exist? $fConf
# Application classpath
$: << ($hConf[:appRoot] || File.expand_path("../bin/app", __FILE__))
# Ruby libs
$lib = ($hConf[:rubyLib] || File.expand_path("../bin/lib", __FILE__))
($: << [$lib]).flatten! # lib is string or array, standardize
Then I just need to make sure that this script is called once before anything else, and don't need to touch the individual source files.
I put some options inside a config file, like the location of external (non-gem) libraries:
# Site- and server specific config - location of DB, tmp files etc.
{
:webRoot => "/srv/www/myapp/data",
:rubyLib => "/somewhere/lib",
:tmpDir => "/tmp/myapp"
}
This has been working well for me, and I can reuse the setenv script in multiple projects just by changing the parameters in the config file. A much better alternative than shell scripts, IMO.