I want to use a for-each and a counter:
i=0
for blah in blahs
puts i.to_s + " " + blah
i+=1
end
Is there a better way to do it?
Note: I don't know if blahs is an array or a hash, but having to do blahs[i] wouldn't make it much sexier. Also I'd like to know how to write i++ in Ruby.
Technically, Matt's and Squeegy's answer came in first, but I'm giving best answer to paradoja so spread around the points a bit on SO. Also his answer had the note about versions, which is still relevant (as long as my Ubuntu 8.04 is using Ruby 1.8.6).
Should've used puts "#{i} #{blah}" which is a lot more succinct.
As people have said, you can use
each_with_index
but if you want indices with an iterator different to "each" (for example, if you want to map with an index or something like that) you can concatenate enumerators with the each_with_index method, or simply use with_index:
blahs.each_with_index.map { |blah, index| something(blah, index)}
blahs.map.with_index { |blah, index| something(blah, index) }
This is something you can do from ruby 1.8.7 and 1.9.
[:a, :b, :c].each_with_index do |item, i|
puts "index: #{i}, item: #{item}"
end
You can't do this with for. I usually like the more declarative call to each personally anyway. Partly because its easy to transition to other forms when you hits the limit of the for syntax.
Yes, it's collection.each to do loops, and then each_with_index to get the index.
You probably ought to read a Ruby book because this is fundamental Ruby and if you don't know it, you're going to be in big trouble (try: http://poignantguide.net/ruby/).
Taken from the Ruby source code:
hash = Hash.new
%w(cat dog wombat).each_with_index {|item, index|
hash[item] = index
}
hash #=> {"cat"=>0, "wombat"=>2, "dog"=>1}
If you don't have the new version of each_with_index, you can use the zip method to pair indexes with elements:
blahs = %w{one two three four five}
puts (1..blahs.length).zip(blahs).map{|pair|'%s %s' % pair}
which produces:
1 one
2 two
3 three
4 four
5 five
As to your question about doing i++, well, you cannot do that in Ruby. The i += 1 statement you had is exactly how you're supposed to do it.
If you want to get index of ruby for each, then you can use
.each_with_index
Here is an example to show how .each_with_index works:
range = ('a'..'z').to_a
length = range.length - 1
range.each_with_index do |letter, index|
print letter + " "
if index == length
puts "You are at last item"
end
end
This will print:
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z You are at last item
The enumerating enumerable series is pretty nice.
If blahs is a class that mixes in Enumerable, you should be able to do this:
blahs.each_with_index do |blah, i|
puts("#{i} #{blah}")
end
Related
I have an instance of Enumerator::Generator that yields strings. I need to join them into a single string.
What's a good way of doing this? I notice that * doesn't work. I know I can .map {|x| x} first but that seems rather un-idiomatic
I think in this case I' might reach for inject/reduce (aliases for the same method, reduce as a name makes more sense, to me) with the + operator:
enum.reduce(:+)
# or, passing in a block
enum.reduce(&:+)
As a full example:
# never used Enumerator::Generator directly, but you called it out specifically
# in your question, and this seems to be doing the trick to get it working
enum = Enumerator::Generator.new do |y|
y.yield "ant"
y.yield "bear"
y.yield "cat"
end
p enum.reduce(&:+) # output: "antbearcat"
# crude example of modifying the strings as you join them
p enum.reduce('') { |memo, word| memo += word.upcase + ' ' }
# output: "ANT BEAR CAT "
a=["Raja","gopalan"].to_enum #let's assume this is your enumerator
Write the following code
p a.map(&:itself).join
Or
p a.to_a.join
output
"Rajagopalan"
In more ruby way of doing project euler #2 , part of the code is
while((v = fib(i)) < 4_000_000)
s+=v if v%2==0
i+=1
end
Is there a way to change i += 1 into a more functional programming style construct?
The best I can think of is
Float::MAX.to_i.times do |i|
v = fib(i)
break unless v < 4_000_000
s += v if v%2==0
end
because you can't call .times on a floating point number.
Numeric.step has default parameters of infinity (the limit) and 1 (the step size).
1.step do |i|
#...
end
For fun, you might even want to try
1.step.size
There’s a predefined (in 1.9.2) constant Float::INFINITY, so you could write
1.upto(Float::INFINITY) do |i|
...
end
(You could also use Enumerator and take_while, turning the problem inside out to make it look more like Haskell or Python, but take_while is greedy and builds an array.)
Ruby 2.5 introduced the open-ended Range:
(1..).each do |i|
#...
end
code:
c = 0
items.each { |i|
puts i.to_s
# if c > 9 escape the each iteration early - and do not repeat
c++
}
I want to grab the first 10 items then leave the "each" loop.
What do I replace the commented line with? is there a better approach? something more Ruby idiomatic?
While the break solution works, I think a more functional approach really suits this problem. You want to take the first 10 elements and print them so try
items.take(10).each { |i| puts i.to_s }
There is no ++ operator in Ruby. It's also convention to use do and end for multi-line blocks. Modifying your solution yields:
c = 0
items.each do |i|
puts i.to_s
break if c > 9
c += 1
end
Or also:
items.each_with_index do |i, c|
puts i.to_s
break if c > 9
end
See each_with_index and also Programming Ruby Break, Redo, and Next.
Update: Chuck's answer with ranges is more Ruby-like, and nimrodm's answer using take is even better.
break works for escaping early from a loop, but it's more idiomatic just to do items[0..9].each {|i| puts i}. (And if all you're doing is literally printing the items with no changes at all, you can just do puts items[0..9].)
Another option would be
items.first(10).each do |i|
puts i.to_s
end
That reads a little more easily to me than breaking on an iterator, and first will return only as many items as available if there aren't enough.
Another variant:
puts items.first(10)
Note that this works fine with arrays of less than 10 items:
>> nums = (1..5).to_a
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
>> puts nums.first(10)
1
2
3
4
5
(One other note, a lot of people are offering some form of puts i.to_s, but in such a case, isn't .to_s redundant? puts will automatically call .to_s on a non-string to print it out, I thought. You would only need .to_s if you wanted to say puts 'A' + i.to_s or the like.)
Does this look like what you want?
10.times { |i|
puts items[i].to_s
}
items.each_with_index { |i, c| puts i and break if c <= 9 }
It was asked:
I want to grab the first 10 items then leave the "each" loop.
Use throw and catch to accomplish this, with few changes to the example:
catch(:done) do
c = 0
collected = []
items.each do |item|
collected << item
throw(:done, collected) if c == 9 # started at 0
c += 1
end
collected # if the list is less than 10 long, return what was collected
end
Simply throw the label :done with collected and the catch which is waiting for :done will return collected.
And to "ruby" this up a bit:
catch(:done) do
items.inject([]) do |collected, item|
throw(:done, collected) if collected.size == 10
collected << item # collected gets returned here and populates the first argument of this block
end
end
I do not know why some people refuse to use inject and use reduce instead (they are equivalent) when clearly the empty array given to inject([]) is being injected with items! Anyhow, the inject will return collected if there are less than 10 items.
Most answers are trying to answer what might be the intent of the question instead of what was asked and items.take(10) does make perfect sense in that case. But I can imagine wanting to grab the first items that fit within my $100 budget. Then you can simply:
catch(:done) do
items.inject({items: [], budget: 100}) do |ledger, item|
remainder = ledger[:budget] - item.price
if remainder < 0
throw(:done, ledger)
else
ledger.tap do |this|
this[:items] << item
this[:budget] = remainder
end # tap just returns what is being tapped into, in this case, ledger
end
end
end
How do I do this type of for loop in Ruby?
for(int i=0; i<array.length; i++) {
}
array.each do |element|
element.do_stuff
end
or
for element in array do
element.do_stuff
end
If you need index, you can use this:
array.each_with_index do |element,index|
element.do_stuff(index)
end
limit = array.length;
for counter in 0..limit
--- make some actions ---
end
the other way to do that is the following
3.times do |n|
puts n;
end
thats will print 0, 1, 2, so could be used like array iterator also
Think that variant better fit to the author's needs
I keep hitting this as a top link for google "ruby for loop", so I wanted to add a solution for loops where the step wasn't simply '1'. For these cases, you can use the 'step' method that exists on Numerics and Date objects. I think this is a close approximation for a 'for' loop.
start = Date.new(2013,06,30)
stop = Date.new(2011,06,30)
# step back in time over two years, one week at a time
start.step(stop, -7).each do |d|
puts d
end
The equivalence would be
for i in (0...array.size)
end
or
(0...array.size).each do |i|
end
or
i = 0
while i < array.size do
array[i]
i = i + 1 # where you may freely set i to any value
end
array.each_index do |i|
...
end
It's not very Rubyish, but it's the best way to do the for loop from question in Ruby
To iterate a loop a fixed number of times, try:
n.times do
#Something to be done n times
end
If you don't need to access your array, (just a simple for loop) you can use upto or each :
Upto:
2.upto(4) {|i| puts i}
2
3
4
Each:
(2..4).each {|i| puts i}
2
3
4
What? From 2010 and nobody mentioned Ruby has a fine for /in loop (it's just nobody uses it):
ar = [1,2,3,4,5,6]
for item in ar
puts item
end
['foo', 'bar', 'baz'].each_with_index {|j, i| puts "#{i} #{j}"}
Ruby's enumeration loop syntax is different:
collection.each do |item|
...
end
This reads as "a call to the 'each' method of the array object instance 'collection' that takes block with 'blockargument' as argument". The block syntax in Ruby is 'do ... end' or '{ ... }' for single line statements.
The block argument '|item|' is optional but if provided, the first argument automatically represents the looped enumerated item.
What's the slickest, most Ruby-like way to do this?
[1, 3, 10, 5].diff
should produce
[2, 7, -5]
that is, an array of first order differences. I've come up with a solution which I'll add below, but it requires ruby 1.9 and isn't all that slick. what else is possible?
I like this functional style:
module Enumerable
def diff
each_cons(2).map {|pair| pair.reverse.reduce :-}
end
end
EDIT: I just realized that the reverse is totally unnecessary. If this were a functional language, I would have used pattern matching, but Ruby doesn't support pattern matching. It does, however, support destructuring bind, which is a good enough approximation for pattern matching in this case.
each_cons(2).map {|first, second| second - first}
No smiley, though.
I like how this sounds if you just read it out loud from left to right: "For each pair, apply the difference between the first and second elements of the pair." In fact, I normally don't like the name collect and prefer map instead, but in this case that reads even better:
each_cons(2).collect {|first, second| second - first}
"For each pair, collect the difference between its elements." Sounds almost like a definition of first order difference.
Yet another way..Seems the shortest so far:)
module Enumerable
def diff
self[1..-1].zip(self).map {|x| x[0]-x[1]}
end
end
The concept comes from functional programming, of course:
module Enumerable
def diff
self.inject([0]) { |r,x| r[-1] += x; r << -x } [1..-2]
end
end
[1,3,10,5].diff
Note that you don't need any separate intermediate variables here
Here's the fastest way I could find (faster than all the others suggested here as of this moment, in both 1.8 and 1.9):
module Enumerable
def diff
last=nil
map do |x|
r = last ? x - last : nil
last = x
r
end.compact
end
end
With this close runner-up:
module Enumerable
def diff
r = []
1.upto(size-1) {|i| r << self[i]-self[i-1]}
r
end
end
Of the others here, testr's self-described "feeble" attempt is the next fastest, but it's still slower than either of these.
And if speed is no object, here's my aesthetic favorite:
module Enumerable
def diff!
[-shift+first] + diff! rescue []
end
def diff
dup.diff!
end
end
But this is (for reasons I don't entirely understand) an order of magnitude slower than any other suggestion here!
Minor variation on Jörg W Mittag's:
module Enumerable
def diff
each_cons(2).map{|a,b| b-a}
end
end
# Attempt, requires ruby 1.9.
module Enumerable
def diff
each_cons(2).with_object([]){|x,array| array << x[1] - x[0]}
end
end
Example:
[1,3,10,5].diff
=> [2, 7, -5]
Another way to do it.
module Enumerable
def diff
result = []
each_with_index{ |x, i|
return result if (i == (self.length-1))
result << self[i+1] - x
}
end
end
My feeble attempt...
module Enumerable
def diff
na = []
self.each_index { |x| r << self[x]-self[x-1] if x > 0 }
na
end
end
p [1,3,10,5].diff #returned [2, 7, -5]