Is there a way to implement monkey patching while an object is being instantiated?
When I call:
a = Foo.new
Prior to the instance being instantiated, I would like to extend the Foo class based on information which I will read from a data store. As such, each time I call Foo.new, the extension(s) that will be added to that instance of the class would change dynamically.
tl;dr: Adding methods to an instance is possible.
Answer: Adding methods to an instance is not possible. Instances in Ruby don't have methods. But each instance can have a singleton class, where one can add methods, which will then be only available on the single instance that this singleton class is made for.
class Foo
end
foo = Foo.new
def foo.bark
puts "Woof"
end
foo.bark
class << foo
def chew
puts "Crunch"
end
end
foo.chew
foo.define_singleton_method(:mark) do
puts "Widdle"
end
foo.mark
are just some of the ways to define a singleton method for an object.
module Happy
def cheer
puts "Wag"
end
end
foo.extend(Happy)
foo.cheer
This takes another approach, it will insert the module between the singleton class and the real class in the inheritance chain. This way, too, the module is available to the instance, but not on the whole class.
Sure you can!
method_name_only_known_at_runtime = 'hello'
string_only_known_at_runtime = 'Hello World!'
test = Object.new
test.define_singleton_method(method_name_only_known_at_runtime) do
puts(string_only_known_at_runtime)
end
test.hello
#> Hello World!
Prior to the instance being instantiated, I would like to extend
Given a class Foo which does something within its initialize method:
class Foo
attr_accessor :name
def initialize(name)
self.name = name
end
end
And a module FooExtension which wants to alter that behavior:
module FooExtension
def name=(value)
#name = value.reverse.upcase
end
end
You could patch it via prepend:
module FooPatcher
def initialize(*)
extend(FooExtension) if $do_extend # replace with actual logic
super
end
end
Foo.prepend(FooPatcher)
Or you could extend even before calling initialize by providing your own new class method:
class Foo
def self.new(*args)
obj = allocate
obj.extend(FooExtension) if $do_extend # replace with actual logic
obj.send(:initialize, *args)
obj
end
end
Both variants produce the same result:
$do_extend = false
Foo.new('hello')
#=> #<Foo:0x00007ff66582b640 #name="hello">
$do_extend = true
Foo.new('hello')
#=> #<Foo:0x00007ff66582b280 #name="OLLEH">
Related
I want to define methods dynamically using an array of strings.
Here is a simple piece of code that should achieve that.
class SomeClass
attr_accessor :my_array
def initialize(user, record)
#my_array=[]
end
my_array.each do |element|
alias_method "#{element}?".to_sym, :awesome_method
end
def awesome_method
puts 'awesome'
end
end
When I instantiate this class in the console, I get the following error
NoMethodError (undefined method `each' for nil:NilClass)
What is wrong with this code and how to make it work. any help highly appreciated :)
Edit 1:
What I ultimately want to achieve is to inherit from SomeClass and override my_array in the child class to dynamically define methods with its attributes like so
class OtherClass < SomeClass
my_array = %w[method1 method2 method3]
# Some mechanism to over write my_array.
end
And then use self.inherited to dynamically define methods in child class.
Is there a good way to achieve this?
In your code, you use an instance variable (#my_array) and an attr_accessor over it, and then try to access my_array from class level (that is, from the body of the class definition, outside of any methods). But instance variables only exist at instance level, so it is not available in the class scope.
One solution (the natural one, and the one which you would probably use in other languages) is to use a class variable: ##my_array. But class variables in ruby are a little problematic, so the best solution would be to make use of class instance variables, like that:
class SomeClass
class << self
attr_accessor :my_array
end
#my_array=[]
def initialize(user, record)
end
#my_array.each do |element|
alias_method "#{element}?".to_sym, :awesome_method
end
def awesome_method
puts 'awesome'
end
end
The syntax is a little tricky, so, if you look that up and it still doesn't makes sense, try just reading about scopes and using a regular class variable with ##.
Edit:
Ok, so, after your edit, it became more clear what you are trying to accomplish. A full working example is like follows:
class SomeClass
class << self
attr_accessor :my_array
end
#my_array=[]
def awesome_method
puts 'awesome'
end
def self.build!
#my_array.each do |element|
self.define_method("#{element}?".to_sym){ awesome_method }
end
end
end
class ChildClass < SomeClass
#my_array = %w[test little_test]
self.build!
end
child_instance = ChildClass.new
child_instance.test?
>> awesome
child_instance.little_test?
>> awesome
So, I've made some tweaks on SomeClass:
It does not need an initialize method
I tried to use the inherited hook for this problem. It won't ever work, because this hook is called as soon as "ChildClass < SomeClass" is written, and this must be before you can define something like #my_array = %w[test little_test]. So, I have added a self.build! method that must be called in the child instances so that they build their methods from my_array. This is inevitable, but I think it is also good, because it makes more explicit in the subclasses that you are doing something interesting there.
I think you want "define_method", not "alias_method".
awesome_method in passed in a block, which is ruby's way of doing functional programming.
With that done, ChildClass inherits from SomeClass, and it's instances have the dynamically created methods 'test?' and 'little_test?'.
You need to change my_array to class level accessible, in my case class constant.
class SomeClass
DYNAMIC_METHOD_NAMES = %w(method_a method_b method_C).freeze
def initialize(user, record)
end
DYNAMIC_METHOD_NAMES.each do |element|
alias_method "#{element}?".to_sym, :awesome_method
end
def awesome_method
puts 'awesome'
end
end
I'm confused about using "include" vs "extend, after searching for hours all I got is that module methods used with instance of the class including the module, and module methods used with the class itself when the class extending the module of those methods.
but this didn't help me to figure out, why this code give error when commenting the extend module line in "#extend Inventoryable"
while work when uncomment it, here's the code
module Inventoryable
def create(attributes)
object = new(attributes)
instances.push(object)
return object
end
def instances
#instances ||= []
end
def stock_count
#stock_count ||= 0
end
def stock_count=(number)
#stock_count = number
end
def in_stock?
stock_count > 0
end
end
class Shirt
#extend Inventoryable
include Inventoryable
attr_accessor :attributes
def initialize(attributes)
#attributes = attributes
end
end
shirt1 = Shirt.create(name: "MTF", size: "L")
shirt2 = Shirt.create(name: "MTF", size: "M")
puts Shirt.instances.inspect
the output is
store2.rb:52:in `<main>': undefined method `create' for Shirt:Class (NoMethodError)
while when uncomment the "extend Inventoryable" to make the code work:
module Inventoryable
def create(attributes)
object = new(attributes)
instances.push(object)
return object
end
def instances
#instances ||= []
end
def stock_count
#stock_count ||= 0
end
def stock_count=(number)
#stock_count = number
end
def in_stock?
stock_count > 0
end
end
class Shirt
extend Inventoryable
include Inventoryable
attr_accessor :attributes
def initialize(attributes)
#attributes = attributes
end
end
shirt1 = Shirt.create(name: "MTF", size: "L")
shirt2 = Shirt.create(name: "MTF", size: "M")
puts Shirt.instances.inspect
makes the code work and output the following
[#<Shirt:0x0055792cb93890 #attributes={:name=>"MTF", :size=>"L"}>, #<Shirt:0x0055792cb937a0 #attributes={:name=>"MTF", :size=>"M"}>]
it's kinda confusing, but all I need to know, is why I need to extend the module in order to avoid the error ?, and how to edit this code to make it work without the extend method ? , what's left in the code that still depends on the extend ?
When you extend a module, the methods in that module become "class methods"**. So, when you extend Inventoryable, create becomes available as a method on the Shirt class.
When you include a module, the methods in that module become "instance methods"**. So, when you include Inventoryable, create is not available on the Shirt class (but is available on an instance of Shirt).
To make create available on the Shirt class when using include, you can use the included hook. That might look something like:
module Inventoryable
module ClassMethods
def create
puts "create!"
end
end
module InstanceMethods
end
def self.included(receiver)
receiver.extend ClassMethods
receiver.include InstanceMethods
end
end
Then if you do:
class Shirt
include Invetoryable
end
You can do:
> Shirt.create
create!
=> nil
** The ruby purists in the crowd will correctly point out that, in ruby, everything is an instance method and that there are no class methods. That is formally 100% correct, but we'll use the colloquial meaning of class and instance methods here.
When you extend a module in a class, you get the module's methods exposed as class methods but if you include the module then you get the module's method as instance methods, in your example for you to be able to call create method of Inventoryable class you need to invoke it using an instance of Shirt class (if you include the module)
shirt1 = Shirt.new(attributes).create(attributes)
Without more info I can't tell what you are trying to do but you need to redesign the initialize and create methods to decide where or what to do in those methods.
I'll try to explain it using a simple example
module A
def test
puts "ok"
end
end
class B
include A
end
class C
extend A
end
puts C.test # here you invoke the method against the class itself
puts B.new.test #here you create an instance to do it
Hope it helps.
At the end of the day, it's really simple:
C.include(M) makes the current superclass of C the superclass of M and M the superclass of C. In other words, it inserts M into C's ancestry chain.
obj.extend(M) is (roughly) the same as obj.singleton_class.include(M).
I use a gem to manage certain attributes of a gmail api integration, and I'm pretty happy with the way it works.
I want to add some local methods to act on the Gmail::Message class that is used in that gem.
i.e. I want to do something like this.
models/GmailMessage.rb
class GmailMessage < Gmail::Message
def initialize(gmail)
#create a Gmail::Message instance as a GmailMessage instance
self = gmail
end
def something_clever
#do something clever utilising the Gmail::Message methods
end
end
I don't want to persist it. But obviously I can't define self in that way.
To clarify, I want to take an instance of Gmail::Message and create a GmailMessage instance which is a straight copy of that other message.
I can then run methods like #gmail.subject and #gmail.html, but also run #gmail.something_clever... and save local attributes if necessary.
Am I completely crazy?
You can use concept of mixin, wherein you include a Module in another class to enhance it with additional functions.
Here is how to do it. To create a complete working example, I have created modules that resemble what you may have in your code base.
# Assumed to be present in 3rd party gem, dummy implementation used for demonstration
module Gmail
class Message
def initialize
#some_var = "there"
end
def subject
"Hi"
end
end
end
# Your code
module GmailMessage
# You can code this method assuming as if it is an instance method
# of Gmail::Message. Once we include this module in that class, it
# will be able to call instance methods and access instance variables.
def something_clever
puts "Subject is #{subject} and #some_var = #{#some_var}"
end
end
# Enhance 3rd party class with your code by including your module
Gmail::Message.include(GmailMessage)
# Below gmail object will actually be obtained by reading the user inbox
# Lets create it explicitly for demonstration purposes.
gmail = Gmail::Message.new
# Method can access methods and instance variables of gmail object
p gmail.something_clever
#=> Subject is Hi and #some_var = there
# You can call the methods of original class as well on same object
p gmail.subject
#=> "Hi"
Following should work:
class GmailMessage < Gmail::Message
def initialize(extra)
super
# some additional stuff
#extra = extra
end
def something_clever
#do something clever utilising the Gmail::Message methods
end
end
GmailMessage.new # => will call first the initializer of Gmail::Message class..
Building upon what the other posters have said, you can use built-in class SimpleDelegator in ruby to wrap an existing message:
require 'delegate'
class MyMessage < SimpleDelegator
def my_clever_method
some_method_on_the_original_message + "woohoo"
end
end
class OriginalMessage
def some_method_on_the_original_message
"hey"
end
def another_original_method
"zoink"
end
end
original = OriginalMessage.new
wrapper = MyMessage.new(original)
puts wrapper.my_clever_method
# => "heywoohoo"
puts wrapper.another_original_method
# => "zoink"
As you can see, the wrapper automatically forwards method calls to the wrapped object.
I'm not sure why you can't just have a simple wrapper class...
class GmailMessage
def initialize(message)
#message = message
end
def something_clever
# do something clever here
end
def method_missing(m, *args, &block)
if #message.class.instance_methods.include?(m)
#message.send(m, *args, &block)
else
super
end
end
end
Then you can do...
#my_message = GmailMessage.new(#original_message)
#my_message will correctly respond to all the methods that were supported with #original_message and you can add your own methods to the class.
EDIT - changed thanks to #jeeper's observations in the comments
It's not the prettiest, but it works...
class GmailMessage < Gmail::Message
def initialize(message)
message.instance_variables.each do |variable|
self.instance_variable_set(
variable,
message.instance_variable_get(variable)
)
end
end
def something_clever
# do something clever here
end
end
Thanks for all your help guys.
I have created a class which I have some constant hashes. I'd like to type Myclass.myhash.hashkey and to show the value of the hash. Right Now I have created a similar behavior with method_missing but I have to initialize the object, so I am calling it like Myclass.new.myhash.hashkey and it works. Here is my code so far:
class Myclass
def initialize
#attributes = []
end
def method_missing(name, *args)
#attributes << name
if #attributes.length == 2
eval("#{#attributes.first.upcase}[:#{#attributes.last.downcase}]")
else
self
end
end
MYHASH = {
id: 1,
description: "A nice hash",
hashkey: "hash key"
}
end
How can I do it without initialize and without new so it won't create an object of MyClass everytime?
Update:
The first question was explained by toro2k but I don't know if using it I can have the behavior of my second question...
Question 2
I have many openstructs in my class, how can I define them as a class methods dynamically without every time adding something like:
def self.myhash
MYHASH
end
You could use an OpenStruct object instead of the Hash:
class MyClass
MYHASH = OpenStruct.new(id: 1,
description: 'A nice Ostruct',
hashkey: 'hash key')
def self.myhash
MYHASH
end
end
MyClass.myhash.id # => 1
MyClass.myhash.description # => "A nice Ostruct"
MyClass.myhash.foo # => nil
Update You could replace constants with class instance variables like this:
class MyClass
def self.myhash
#myhash ||= OpenStruct(id: ...)
end
end
MyClass.myhash.id
Or you could use class variables and cattr_reader:
class MyClass
cattr_reader :myhash
##myhash = OpenStruct(id: ...)
end
MyClass.myhash.id
Or you could get rid of the myhash method and access the constant directly:
class MyClass
MYHASH = OpenStruct(id: ...)
end
MyClass::MYHASH.id
I have finally found a solution for my second question also:
class << self
Myclass.constants.each do |constant|
define_method(constant.to_s.downcase) do
eval("#{constant}")
end
end
end
I just have to add it at the end of the class to work, after I have defined all the openstruct variables.
I have the following code:
class MyClass
module MyModule
class << self
attr_accessor :first_name
def myfunction
MyModule.first_name = "Nathan"
end
end
end
end
When I call the method myfunction like so, it works fine:
> me = MyClass::MyModule.myfunction
=> "Nathan"
> me
=> "Nathan"
But if I removed the class << self and add a self. prefix to myfunction, it doesn't work.
For example:
class MyClass
module MyModule
attr_accessor :first_name
def self.myfunction
MyModule.first_name = "Nathan"
end
end
end
> me = MyClass::MyModule.myfunction
NoMethodError: undefined method `first_name=' for MyClass::MyModule:Module
I'm trying to understand the class << self method. I thought it was a way add the self. prefix to the all the methods inside of it, but if that was true, why doesn't it work if I remove it and prefix each method with self. manually?
Thanks in advance for your help.
This is because your attr_accessor :first_name is also wrapped by the class << self.
To do it the way you suggest, you can use mattr_accessor like so:
require 'active_support'
class MyClass
module MyModule
mattr_accessor :first_name
def self.myfunction
MyModule.first_name = "Nathan"
end
end
end
To better understand how you can achieve what you want, take a look at the following example:
module PrintingModule
def self.included(object)
object.extend(ClassMethods)
end
module ClassMethods
def class_method_of_class
puts "I am class #{self.name}"
end
end
def instance_method_of_class
puts "My name is: #{#name}"
end
class << self
def static_module_method
puts "Printer version 1.0"
end
end
end
class SomeObject
include PrintingModule
def initialize(name)
#name = name
end
end
object = SomeObject.new("Something")
object.instance_method_of_class
SomeObject.class_method_of_class
PrintingModule.static_module_method
I hope it's more clear now, note that this is just one of possible way (there are others)
UPDATE:
I'll try to be more specific. When you define instance/singleton methods on module, what you are really doing is that you are defining instance methods of class which will include that module and on the other hand, class methods defined on module will become class methods of that module. The second think to know is that attr_accessor creates instance method for getter and setter of the given parameter.
Now to answer one part of your question, in the first example you are creating 3 class methods on module's class. In the second one, you are creating 1 class method where you are trying to access another class method (setter), but your getters and setters are defined as instance methods = they will become instance of method of class which will include your module, you cannot get to them this way = you have no access to your getters and setters.
As for explanation of self, well I'm not that skilled, but as far as I know, when you use "class << self" you are opening eigenclass (each object has it's own anynonymous one) of the object (note that Class, modules or instances of classes are of course objects too) where you are defining instance methods. Class method of object in Ruby = instance method of the eigenclass of the object. So you can do this for example:
text = "something"
class << text
def say_hi
puts "Hi!"
end
end
text.say_hi
When you create instance of class (String in that example), that instance gets it's own unique anonymous class which is subclass of that Class. In the example, you have defined instance method on the eigenclass of the anonymous subclass of String class. So you can use method "say_hi" on the text object but not on the String class. So "class << self" is opening those eigenclasses.
On the other hand, "self" alone just represents an object in the current context, which means the same in some scenarios (for example yours). As for self.included method, it is just a callback method which gets called when the module is included in the class with a parameter representing the object (here class SomeObject).
I hope that I have answered at least part of your question.
More information here:
Difference between 'self.method_name' and 'class << self' in Ruby