I'm trying to understand this function.
What I can see is an attribute and type are passed to the opal() method.
Then type_name takes its value from type as long as type is a Symbol or String. Otherwise, the name method is called on type. I imagine the name method is similar to the class method to get the class of the type argument.
After self.class_eval I'm kind of lost but my guess is this is defining maybe a block of code to be added to the class referenced by self.
How this works I'm not sure though.
Would appreciate if someone could explain what's going on after self.class_eval << DEF.
def opal(attr, type)
self.ds "#{attr}_id"
type_name = (type.is_a?(Symbol) || type.is_a?(String)) ? type : type.name
self.class_eval <<DEF
def #{attr}
if defined?(##{attr})
##{attr}
else
##{attr} = if self.#{attr}_id
#{type_name}.get(self.#{attr}_id)
else
nil
end
end
end
def #{attr}=(value)
self.#{attr}_id = value.key
##{attr} = value
end
DEF
end
Everything between <<DEF and DEF is just a string and the #{ ... }s work on that string like any other.
class_eval will cause the interpreter to run on the string in the context of the module.
So, if you know what attr and type are then you can work out what code is being run to add methods to the class.
Lets say attr is "foo" and type is "Bazzle". The code being run would be:
def foo
if defined?(#foo)
#foo
else
#foo = if self.foo_id
Bazzle.get(self.foo_id)
else
nil
end
end
end
def foo=(value)
self.foo_id = value.key
#foo = value
end
To make it easy to understand, let's suppose the value of 'attr' is 'foo', here's what it looks like now:
self.class_eval <<DEF
def foo
if defined?(#foo) # Return the value of attr if it's defined
#foo
else
#foo = if self.foo_id
#{type_name}.get(self.foo_id)
else
nil
end
end
end
def foo=(value) # Define setter
self.foo_id = value.key
#foo = value
end
DEF
So it's just defining some getter and setter methods for #foo, and evaluating it at the class level.
Related
I want to create a special settings class Settings. The class should be able to handle cases when a user types something like Settings.new.method_1.method_2.method_3 and it's translated to something like:
result = nil
if ConfigurationSettings['method_1'].present?
result = ConfigurationSettings['method_1']
if result['method_2'].present?
result = result['method_2']
...
end
return result
Of course, I'll make it more flexible later so it can have more than 2/3 "methods".
I guess this is the issue you are facing:
class Settings
def abc
puts "abc"
end
def xyz
puts "xyz"
end
end
s = Settings.new
s.abc
#abc
# => nil
s.xyz
#xyz
# => nil
s.abc.xyz
#abc
#NoMethodError: undefined method `xyz' for nil:NilClass
The issue here is s.abc is returning nil and xyz is called over nil. What you are trying to achieve is called Method Chaining. Now, xyz needs an Settings object. Simplest thing to do here is:
class Settings2
def abc
puts "abc"
self
end
def xyz
puts "xyz"
self
end
end
s2 = Settings2.new
s2.abc.xyz
#abc
#xyz
method_missing is available for your use and can be used to help you solve this problem. Coupling this with method chaining and you're good to go. For example:
class Settings
def method_missing(meth)
puts "Missing #{meth}"
self
end
def test
puts "Test"
self
end
end
a = Settings.new
a.test
a.test.b
a.b.test
The trouble with the other answers is all the methods return "self" so if you want to access a nested value...
final_value = Settings.new.method_1.method_2.method_3
You're just going to get the whole settings hash instead.
Try this instead...
class Settings
class SubSettings
def initialize(sub_setting)
#sub_setting = sub_setting
end
def method_missing(method, *arguments, &block)
if #sub_setting[method].is_a?(Hash)
SubSettings.new #sub_setting[method]
else
#sub_setting[method]
end
end
def answer
#sub_setting
end
end
def initialize
#settings = ConfigurationSettings
end
def method_missing(method, *arguments, &block)
SubSettings.new #settings[method]
end
end
ConfigurationSettings = {level1a: {level2a: {level3a: "hello", level3b: "goodbye"}, level2b: {level3b: "howdy"}}}
result = Settings.new.level1a.level2a.level3b
p result
=> "goodbye"
What this does is take the initial method and takes the associated sub-hash of the ConfigurationSettings hash and stored it into a new object of class SubSettings. It applies the next method and if the result is another sub-hash it iterates to create another SubSettings, etc. It only returns the actual result when it no longer sees hashes.
To achieve a DSL like attribute assignment,a dual-purpose accessor was utilized. However, I was seeking a way to refactor the obvious code duplication.
class Layer
def size(size=nil)
return #size unless size
#size = size
end
def type(type=nil)
return #type unless type
#type = type
end
def color(color=nil)
return #color unless color
#color = color
end
end
I was thinking define those method in a class method by using define_method along with other methods to get/set the instance variables. However, the dilemma is how can I access the instance from class method?
def self.createAttrMethods
[:size,:type,:color].each do |attr|
define_method(attr) do |arg=nil|
#either use instance.send() or
#instance_variable_get/set
#But those method are instance method !!
end
end
end
Inside of define_method block, self will be pointing to current instance of class. So use instance_variable_get.
class Foo
def self.createAttrMethods
[:size,:type,:color].each do |attr|
define_method(attr) do |arg = nil|
name = "##{attr}"
return instance_variable_get(name) unless arg
instance_variable_set(name, arg)
end
end
end
createAttrMethods
end
f = Foo.new
f.size # => nil
f.size 3
f.size # => 3
I have a data object that contains dozens of attr_accessor fields for various inputs. Can I somehow define the class so that all setters for all fields will e.g. set the value as an empty string instead of the attempted nil?
Here's a little module to do it:
module NilToBlankAttrAccessor
def nil_to_blank_attr_accessor(attr)
attr_reader attr
define_method "#{attr}=" do |value|
value = '' if value.nil?
instance_variable_set "##{attr}", value
end
end
end
Just mix it in:
class Foo
extend NilToBlankAttrAccessor
nil_to_blank_attr_accessor :bar
end
And use it:
foo = Foo.new
foo.bar = nil
p foo.bar # => ""
foo.bar = 'abc'
p foo.bar # => "abc"
How it works
NilToBlankAttrAccessor#nil_to_blank_attr_accessor first defines the attr_reader normally:
attr_reader attr
Then it defines the writer by defining a method with the same name as the accessor, only with an "=" at the end. So, for attribute :bar, the method is named bar=
define_method "#{attr}=" do |value|
...
end
Now it needs to set the variable. First it turns nil into an empty string:
value = '' if value.nil?
Then use instance_variable_set, which does an instance variable assignment where the instance variable isn't known until runtime.
instance_variable_set "##{attr}", value
Class Foo needs nil_to_blank_attr_accessor to be a class method, not an instance method, so it uses extend instead of include:
class Foo
extend NilToBlankAttrAccessor
...
end
Instead of doing
object.foo = given_input
you should do
object.foo = given_input.nil? ? "" : given_input
or if you want to turn false into "" as well, then
object.foo = given_input || ""
I have a list of names and values I'm trying to read in and turn into classes so I'm using Class.new.
The end result I want is a number of classes that work as if defined like:
module MyMod
class AA < Base
def self.value
value1
end
end
class AB < Base
def self.value
value2
end
end
...
end
My current code looks like:
name = 'AA'
value = 'test'
MyMod.const_set name, Class.new(Base) do
???
end
Setting the name works great, but haven't figured out what I need in the block for get value in. Calling def doesn't work because the closure for value gets lost.
I have managed to get things working with:
temp = const_set name, Class.new(Base)
temp.define_singleton_method(:value) { value }
However, it seems like there should be a way to do it with the block of Class.new. Also, I'm really not sure define_singleton_method is actually putting the method in the right place. It works in my tests, but I'm not sure if the method is actually where I think it is or somewhere else up the call chain. I've tried various combinations of class_variable_set, attr_reader, class_eval, instance_eval, and others, but it got to a point where it was just guess and check. I think I still haven't quite wrapped my head around metaprogramming :-/
if i correctly understood your question, this should work for you:
class Base
end
class AA < Base
name = :Blah
klass = self.const_set name, Class.new(Base)
class << klass
def value
__method__
end
end
end
p AA::Blah.value
#=> :value
UPDATE: seems you want it defined in the block:
class Base
end
class AA < Base
name = :Blah
klass = Class.new(Base) do
class << self
def value
__method__
end
end
end
self.const_set name, klass
end
p AA::Blah.value
you trying this:
const_set name, Class.new(Base) do
...
end
it does not work cause the block is referring to const_set rather than to Class.new
If you prefer define_singleton_method over class << self:
class Base
end
class AA < Base
name = :Blah
klass = Class.new(Base) do
self.define_singleton_method :value do
__method__
end
end
self.const_set name, klass
end
And finally if you really want to define them at once, use brackets instead of do...end:
class Base
end
class AA < Base
name = :Blah
self.const_set name, Class.new(Base) {
self.define_singleton_method :value do
__method__
end
}
end
Here is a working demo
Given the following class:
class Test
attr_accessor :name
end
When I create the object, I want to do the following:
t = Test.new {name = 'Some Test Object'}
At the moment, it results in the name attribute still being nil.
Is that possible without adding an initializer?
ok,
I came up with a solution. It uses the initialize method but on the other hand do exactly what you want.
class Test
attr_accessor :name
def initialize(init)
init.each_pair do |key, val|
instance_variable_set('#' + key.to_s, val)
end
end
def display
puts #name
end
end
t = Test.new :name => 'hello'
t.display
happy ? :)
Alternative solution using inheritance. Note, with this solution, you don't need to explicitly declare the attr_accessor!
class CSharpStyle
def initialize(init)
init.each_pair do |key, val|
instance_variable_set('#' + key.to_s, val)
instance_eval "class << self; attr_accessor :#{key.to_s}; end"
end
end
end
class Test < CSharpStyle
def initialize(arg1, arg2, *init)
super(init.last)
end
end
t = Test.new 'a val 1', 'a val 2', {:left => 'gauche', :right => 'droite'}
puts "#{t.left} <=> #{t.right}"
As mentioned by others, the easiest way to do this would be to define an initialize method. If you don't want to do that, you could make your class inherit from Struct.
class Test < Struct.new(:name)
end
So now:
>> t = Test.new("Some Test Object")
=> #<struct Test name="Some Test Object">
>> t.name
=> "Some Test Object"
There is a general way of doing complex object initialization by
passing a block with necessary actions. This block is evaluated in the
context of the object to be initialized, so you have an easy access to
all instance variables and methods.
Continuing your example, we can define this generic initializer:
class Test
attr_accessor :name
def initialize(&block)
instance_eval(&block)
end
end
and then pass it the appropriate code block:
t = Test.new { #name = 'name' }
or
t = Test.new do
self.name = 'name'
# Any other initialization code, if needed.
end
Note that this approach does not require adding much complexity
to the initialize method, per se.
As previously mentioned, the sensible way to do this is either with a Struct or by defining an Test#initialize method. This is exactly what structs and constructors are for. Using an options hash corresponding to attributes is the closest equivalent of your C# example, and it's a normal-looking Ruby convention:
t = Test.new({:name => "something"})
t = Test.new(name: "something") # json-style or kwargs
But in your example you are doing something that looks more like variable assignment using = so let's try using a block instead of a hash. (You're also using Name which would be a constant in Ruby, we'll change that.)
t = Test.new { #name = "something" }
Cool, now let's make that actually work:
class BlockInit
def self.new(&block)
super.tap { |obj| obj.instance_eval &block }
end
end
class Test < BlockInit
attr_accessor :name
end
t = Test.new { #name = "something" }
# => #<Test:0x007f90d38bacc0 #name="something">
t.name
# => "something"
We've created a class with a constructor that accepts a block argument, which is executed within the newly-instantiated object.
Because you said you wanted to avoid using initialize, I'm instead overriding new and calling super to get the default behavior from Object#new. Normally we would define initialize instead, this approach isn't recommended except in meeting the specific request in your question.
When we pass a block into a subclass of BlockInit we can do more than just set variable... we're essentially just injecting code into the initialize method (which we're avoiding writing). If you also wanted an initialize method that does other stuff (as you mentioned in comments) you could add it to Test and not even have to call super (since our changes aren't in BlockInit#initialize, rather BlockInit.new)
Hope that's a creative solution to a very specific and intriguing request.
The code you're indicating is passing parameters into the initialize function. You will most definitely have to either use initialize, or use a more boring syntax:
test = Test.new
test.name = 'Some test object'
Would need to subclass Test (here shown with own method and initializer) e.g.:
class Test
attr_accessor :name, :some_var
def initialize some_var
#some_var = some_var
end
def some_function
"#{some_var} calculation by #{name}"
end
end
class SubClassedTest < Test
def initialize some_var, attrbs
attrbs.each_pair do |k,v|
instance_variable_set('#' + k.to_s, v)
end
super(some_var)
end
end
tester = SubClassedTest.new "some", name: "james"
puts tester.some_function
outputs: some calculation by james
You could do this.
class Test
def not_called_initialize(but_act_like_one)
but_act_like_one.each_pair do |variable,value|
instance_variable_set('#' + variable.to_s, value)
class << self
self
end.class_eval do
attr_accessor variable
end
end
end
end
(t = Test.new).not_called_initialize :name => "Ashish", :age => 33
puts t.name #=> Ashish
puts t.age #=> 33
One advantage is that you don't even have to define your instance variables upfront using attr_accessor. You could pass all the instance variables you need through not_called_initialize method and let it create them besides defining the getters and setters.
If you don't want to override initialize then you'll have to move up the chain and override new. Here's an example:
class Foo
attr_accessor :bar, :baz
def self.new(*args, &block)
allocate.tap do |instance|
if args.last.is_a?(Hash)
args.last.each_pair do |k,v|
instance.send "#{k}=", v
end
else
instance.send :initialize, *args
end
end
end
def initialize(*args)
puts "initialize called with #{args}"
end
end
If the last thing you pass in is a Hash it will bypass initialize and call the setters immediately. If you pass anything else in it will call initialize with those arguments.