I have this variable opinions I want to store as an instance variable in my model... am I right in assuming I will need to add a column for it or else be re-calculating it constantly?
My other question is what is the syntax to store into a column variable instead of just a local one?
Thanks for the help, code below:
# == Schema Information
#
# Table name: simulations
#
# id :integer not null, primary key
# x_size :integer
# y_size :integer
# verdict :string
# arrangement :string
# user_id :integer
#
class Simulation < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :user
serialize :arrangement, Array
validates :user_id, presence: true
validates :x_size, :y_size, presence: true, :numericality => {:only_integer => true}
validates_numericality_of :x_size, :y_size, :greater_than => 0
def self.keys
[:soft, :hard, :none]
end
def generate_arrangement
#opinions = Hash[ Simulation.keys.map { |key| [key, 0] } ]
#arrangement = Array.new(y_size) { Array.new(x_size) }
#arrangement.each_with_index do |row, y_index|
row.each_with_index do |current, x_index|
rand_opinion = Simulation.keys[rand(0..2)]
#arrangement[y_index][x_index] = rand_opinion
#opinions[rand_opinion] += 1
end
end
end
def verdict
if #opinions[:hard] > #opinions[:soft]
:hard
elsif #opinions[:soft] > #opinions[:hard]
:soft
else
:push
end
end
def state
#arrangement
end
def next
new_arrangement = Array.new(#arrangement.size) { |array| array = Array.new(#arrangement.first.size) }
#opinions = Hash[ Simulation.keys.map { |key| [key, 0] } ]
#seating_arrangement.each_with_index do |array, y_index|
array.each_with_index do |opinion, x_index|
new_arrangement[y_index][x_index] = update_opinion_for x_index, y_index
#opinions[new_arrangement[y_index][x_index]] += 1
end
end
#arrangement = new_arrangement
end
private
def in_array_range?(x, y)
((x >= 0) and (y >= 0) and (x < #arrangement[0].size) and (y < #arrangement.size))
end
def update_opinion_for(x, y)
local_opinions = Hash[ Simulation.keys.map { |key| [key, 0] } ]
for y_pos in (y-1)..(y+1)
for x_pos in (x-1)..(x+1)
if in_array_range? x_pos, y_pos and not(x == x_pos and y == y_pos)
local_opinions[#arrangement[y_pos][x_pos]] += 1
end
end
end
opinion = #arrangement[y][x]
opinionated_neighbours_count = local_opinions[:hard] + local_opinions[:soft]
if (opinion != :none) and (opinionated_neighbours_count < 2 or opinionated_neighbours_count > 3)
opinion = :none
elsif opinion == :none and opinionated_neighbours_count == 3
if local_opinions[:hard] > local_opinions[:soft]
opinion = :hard
elsif local_opinions[:soft] > local_opinions[:hard]
opinion = :soft
end
end
opinion
end
end
ActiveRecord analyzes the database tables and creates setter and getter methods with metaprogramming.
So you would create a database column with a migration:
rails g migration AddOpinionToSimulation opinion:hash
Note that not all databases support storing a hash or a similar key/value data type in a column. Postgres does. If you need to use another database such MySQL you should consider using a relation instead (storing the data in another table).
Then when you access simulation.opinion it will automatically get the database column value (if the record is persisted).
Since ActiveRecord creates a setter and getter you can access your property from within the Model as:
class Simulation < ActiveRecord::Base
# ...
def an_example_method
self.opinions # getter method
# since self is the implied receiver you can simply do
opinions
opinions = {foo: "bar"} # setter method.
end
end
The same applies when using the plain ruby attr_accessor, attr_reader and attr_writer macros.
When you assign to an attribute backed by a database column ActiveRecord marks the attribute as dirty and will include it when you save the record.
ActiveRecord has a few methods to directly update attributes: update, update_attributes and update_attribute. There are differences in the call signature and how they handle callbacks.
you can add a method like
def opinions
#opinions ||= Hash[ Simulation.keys.map { |key| [key, 0] }
end
this will cache the operation into the variable #opinions
i would also add a method like
def arrangement
#arrangement ||= Array.new(y_size) { Array.new(x_size) }
end
def rand_opinion
Simulation.keys[rand(0..2)]
end
and then replace the variables with your methods
def generate_arrangement
arrangement.each_with_index do |row, y_index|
row.each_with_index do |current, x_index|
arrangement[y_index][x_index] = rand_opinion
opinions[rand_opinion] += 1
end
end
end
now your opinions and your arrangement will be cached and the code looks better. you didn't have to add a new column in you table
you now hat to replace the #opinions variable with your opinions method
Related
In Rails, i have an object called values that could be 1 of 20 kinds of ActiveRecord, and in only 1 of them there's a method(may be the wrong term, rails newbie) that can add a customized field in returned JSON object where the method name is the field name and method returned value is the field value. For example
class XXXController < ApplicationController
..
if a
values = A
elsif b
values = B
elseif c
values = C
..
end
render :json => values.to_json(:methods => :type_needed)
and you will see response like
{
..
"type_needed": true,
..
}
I only have type_needed defined in A which will return true in some cases. For others like B, C, D... which in total 19, i want them to all have type_needed returned as false, is there a way i can do that in one place instead of add type_needed method in the rest 19?
I will do it as follows:
json = values.to_json(:methods => :type_needed)
# => "[{\"id\":1,\"name\":\"Aaa\"},{\"id\":\"2\",\"name\":\"Bbb\"}]" # => Representational value only
ary = JSON.parse(json)
# => [{"id"=>1, "name"=>"Aaa"}, {"id"=>2, "name"=>"Bbb"}]
ary.map! { |hash| hash[:type_needed] = false unless hash.key?(:type_needed); hash }
# => [{"id"=>1, "name"=>"Aaa", :type_needed=>false}, {"id"=>2, "name"=>"Bbb", :type_needed=>false}]
ary.to_json
# => "[{\"id\":1,\"name\":\"Aaa\",\"type_needed\":false},{\"id\":\"2\",\"name\":\"Bbb\",\"type_needed\":false}]"
If I am understanding your question correctly then you want to define type_needed method once and have it included on all your 20 models. If yes, then you can define a concern and include it in all your 20 models.
app/models/concerns/my_model_concern.rb
module MyModelConcern
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
def type_needed?
self.respond_to?(:some_method)
end
end
app/models/a.rb
class A < ApplicationRecord
include MyModelConcern
def some_method
end
end
app/models/b.rb
class B < ApplicationRecord
include MyModelConcern
end
app/models/c.rb
class C < ApplicationRecord
include MyModelConcern
end
With the above
a = A.new
a.type_needed?
=> true
b = B.new
b.type_needed?
=> false
c = C.new
c.type_needed?
=> false
See if this helps.
I'm trying to retrieve association records that are dependent on their association records' attributes. Below are the (abridged) models.
class Holding
belongs_to :user
has_many :transactions
def amount
transactions.reduce(0) { |m, t| t.buy? ? m + t.amount : m - t.amount }
end
class << self
def without_empty
includes(:transactions).select { |h| h.amount.positive? }
end
end
class Transaction
belongs_to :holding
attributes :action, :amount
def buy?
action == ACTION_BUY
end
end
The problem is my without_empty method returns an array, which prevents me from using my pagination.
Is there a way to rewrite Holding#amount and Holding#without_empty to function more efficiently with ActiveRecord/SQL?
Here's what I ended up using:
def amount
transactions.sum("CASE WHEN action = '#{Transaction::ACTION_BUY}' THEN amount ELSE (amount * -1) END")END")
end
def without_empty
joins(:transactions).group(:id).having("SUM(CASE WHEN transactions.action = '#{Transaction::ACTION_BUY}' THEN transactions.amount ELSE (transactions.amount * -1) END) > 0")
end
The to_json option has options :only and :methods. The former is intended to accept attributes and the latter methods.
I have a model that has an attribute foo, which is overwritten:
class SomeModel < ActiveRecord::Base
...
def foo
# Overrides the original attribute `foo`
"the overwritten foo value"
end
end
The overwritten foo method seems to be called irrespective of which option I write the foo under.
SomeModel.first.to_json(only: [:foo])
# => "{..., \"foo\":\"the overwritten foo value\", ...}"
SomeModel.first.to_json(methods: [:foo])
# => "{..., \"foo\":\"the overwritten foo value\", ...}"
This seems to suggest it does not matter whether I use :only or :methods.
Is this the case? I feel something wrong with my thinking.
The source code leads to these:
File activemodel/lib/active_model/serialization.rb, line 124
def serializable_hash(options = nil)
options ||= {}
attribute_names = attributes.keys
if only = options[:only]
attribute_names &= Array(only).map(&:to_s)
elsif except = options[:except]
attribute_names -= Array(except).map(&:to_s)
end
hash = {}
attribute_names.each { |n| hash[n] = read_attribute_for_serialization(n) }
Array(options[:methods]).each { |m| hash[m.to_s] = send(m) }
serializable_add_includes(options) do |association, records, opts|
hash[association.to_s] = if records.respond_to?(:to_ary)
records.to_ary.map { |a| a.serializable_hash(opts) }
else
records.serializable_hash(opts)
end
end
hash
end
File activeresource/lib/active_resource/base.rb, line 1394
def read_attribute_for_serialization(n)
attributes[n]
end
and it seems that an :only option calls attributes[n] and :methods option calls send(m). What is the difference?
In my model I have attributes: is_a, is_b and is_c. By default all are null.
I need APIs to set them. These attributes can be set as strictly one or in group. If I am to write APIs, I will be doing following in my model:
def set_as_a # strictly a
self.update_attributes!(:is_a => true, :is_b => false, :is_c => false)
end
def set_as_b # strictly b
self.update_attributes!(:is_a => false, :is_b => true, :is_c => false)
end
... # strictly c
def set_as_a_and_b # a and b
self.update_attributes!(:is_a => true, :is_b => true, :is_c => false)
end
..... # so on
While this works, it does not look elegant. Also if in future if the set has more than 3 attributes, it will result more repetitive code. What is the correct elegant way to achieve this?
class SettableAsABC
ATTRS = [:a, :b, :c]
METHOD_RE = /^set_as_([[:alnum:]]+?(?:_and_[[:alnum:]]+?)*)$/
def method_missing(name, *args)
if name.to_s =~ METHOD_RE
trues = $1.split('_and_').map(&:to_sym)
attrs = Hash[ATTRS.map { |a| ["is_#{a}".to_sym, trues.include?(a)] }]
update_attributes(attrs)
else
super
end
end
def respond_to_missing?(name, include_private = false)
!!(name =~ METHOD_RE) || super
end
end
a = SettableAsABC.new
a.set_as_a_and_c
No defining 2^N methods, just plain Ruby metaprogramming.
EDIT: Good point, #Stefan.
EDIT2: My previous edit introduced a bug. Fixed now.
EDIT3: TIL about respond_to_missing?
I might be misunderstanding something, but why not just write a single method that takes params?:
def set_attributes(opts = {})
update_attributes!(opts) unless opts.none?
end
# usage
set_attributes(is_a: false, is_b: true)
EDIT
To dynamically create methods for combinations of your attributes here is what I came up with:
attributes = %w(a b c d)
(1..attributes.size).flat_map { |size| attributes.combination(size).to_a }.each do |methods|
define_method "set_as_#{methods.join('_and_')}" do
update_attributes!(Hash[methods.map { |v| ["is_#{v}", true] }])
end
end
It will generate the following menthods:
set_as_a
set_as_b
set_as_c
set_as_d
set_as_a_and_b
set_as_a_and_c
set_as_a_and_d
set_as_b_and_c
set_as_b_and_d
set_as_c_and_d
set_as_a_and_b_and_c
set_as_a_and_b_and_d
set_as_a_and_c_and_d
set_as_b_and_c_and_d
set_as_a_and_b_and_c_and_d
How about this?
def set_true(true_fields=[])
attr_hash = {}
true_fields.each { |field| attr_hash[field] = true }
update_attributes(hash)
end
Hope that helps!
I'm building this RoR site on an existing database. The user model on database has a column called "secret", which is a bitwise integer that holds information of the columns user has set as secret (first name, last name, etc).
Variables are to the power of two, for example: last name = 1<<1 = 2, first name = 1<<2 = 4, email == 1<<3 = 8, etc. So if user has set first name & email as secret, the column value becomes 4+8 = 12.
Now, I'm trying to find a generalized way to implement these virtual columns into a Rails model. So that, I could do (just a dummy example, the point being, i want to retrieve & store the status):
if user.secret_email?
user.secret_name_last = true
user.secret_name_first = false
end
How to implement these virtual columns neatly to a model (without modifying the existing database)? Current I've got following. It works, but it's not neat. As I've got 20 secret columns, the code looks very ugly.
SECRET_NAME_LAST = (1 << 1) # 2
attr_accessible :secret_name_last
def secret_name_last; secret & SECRET_NAME_LAST > 0 unless secret.nil?; end
def secret_name_last=(value); secret_set_value(SECRET_NAME_LAST, value); end
SECRET_NAME_FIRST = (1 << 2) # 4
attr_accessible :secret_name_first
def secret_name_first; secret & SECRET_NAME_FIRST > 0 unless secret.nil?; end
def secret_name_first=(value); secret_set_value(SECRET_NAME_FIRST, value); end
SECRET_EMAIL = (1 << 3) # 8
attr_accessible :secret_email
def secret_email; secret & SECRET_EMAIL > 0 unless secret.nil?; end
def secret_email=(value); secret_set_value(SECRET_EMAIL, value); end
***snip (17 more)***
private
def secret_set_value(item, value)
if self.secret.nil?
self.secret = 0
end
if value == "1" || value == true || value == 1
# Add item to secret column (if it doesn't exist)
if self.secret & item == 0
self.secret += item
end
else
# Remove item from secret column (if it exists)
if self.secret & item > 0
self.secret -= item
end
end
end
It would be great of I could just do something like:
as_bitwise :secret_name_first, :column=>'secret', :value=>4
as_bitwise :secret_name_last, :column=>'secret', :value=>2
Or even,
as_bitwise :secret, { :secret_name_last=>4, :secret_name_first=>2 }
EDIT
Based on Brandan's excellent answer, this is what I've got currently:
module BitwiseColumn
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
module ClassMethods
def bitwise_column(*args)
mapping = args.extract_options!
column_name = args.shift
real_column_name = args.shift
logger.debug "Initializing bitwisecolumn, column: " + column_name.to_s
mapping.each_pair do |attribute, offset|
logger.debug "\tSetting a pair: offset: " + offset.to_s + ", " + attribute.to_s
mask = 2 ** offset
class_eval %{
attr_accessible :#{column_name}_#{attribute}
def #{column_name}_#{attribute}?
#{real_column_name} & #{mask} > 0 unless #{real_column_name}.nil?
end
def #{column_name}_#{attribute}=(value)
if self.#{real_column_name}.nil?
self.#{real_column_name} = 0
end
if value == "1" || value == true || value == 1
if self.#{real_column_name} & #{mask} == 0
self.#{real_column_name} += #{mask}
end
else
if self.#{real_column_name} & #{mask} > 0
self.#{real_column_name} -= #{mask}
end
end
end
}
end
end
end
end
This allows me to use:
bitwise_column :secret, :realsecretcolumnatdatabase, :name_last=>1, :name_first=>2, :email=>3, :picture=>5, :dob=>6, :place=>12
After that, I can call User.first.secret_name_last? etc.
You can use class_eval to DRY up your code quite a bit. I'd also suggest factoring this behavior into some kind of a module separate from your User class so that you can test it thoroughly and separately from other User-specific behavior.
Like you, I tend to start these kinds of tasks with the desired API and work backwards. I started with this in my model:
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
include BitwiseColumn
bitwise_column :secret, :first_name => 1, :last_name => 2
end
The hash passed to bitwise_column maps the virtual attribute names to their mask value as an exponent. I felt like that was easier to manage than having to remember the powers of 2 myself :-)
Then I created the mixin:
module BitwiseColumn
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
module ClassMethods
def bitwise_column(*args)
mapping = args.extract_options!
column_name = args.shift
mapping.each_pair do |attribute, offset|
mask = 2 ** offset
class_eval %{
def secret_#{attribute}?
#{column_name} & #{mask} > 0 unless #{column_name}.nil?
end
def secret_#{attribute}=(value)
if self.#{column_name}.nil?
self.#{column_name} = 0
end
if value == "1" || value == true || value == 1
if self.#{column_name} & #{mask} == 0
self.#{column_name} += #{mask}
end
else
if self.#{column_name} & #{mask} > 0
self.#{column_name} -= #{mask}
end
end
end
}
end
end
end
end
This mixin creates two instance methods for each virtual attribute, one with a ? and one with a =, since that seems to be what you're after. I used your existing logic for the bitwise operations, which seems to work perfectly.