I've been studing Rails for a not such a long time up to now .... so if there are feel free to correct me
I see that there are two ways of defining methods in rails
def method_name(param)
def self.method_name(param)
The difference (as i understand) is that 1 is mainly used in controllers while 2 is used in models... but occasionaly i bump into methods in models that're defined like 1.
Could you explain to me the main difference of thease two methods?
Number 1. This defines a instance method, that can be used in instances of the model.
Number 2. This defines a class method, and can only be used by the class itself.
Example:
class Lol
def instance_method
end
def self.class_method
end
end
l = Lol.new
l.instance_method #=> This will work
l.class_method #=> This will give you an error
Lol.class_method #=> This will work
The method self.method_name defines the method on the class. Basically within the class definition think of self as referring to the class that is being defined. So when you say def self.method_name you are defining the method on the class itself.
class Foo
def method_name(param)
puts "Instance: #{param}"
end
def self.method_name(param)
puts "Class: #{param}"
end
end
> Foo.new.method_name("bar")
Instance: bar
> Foo.method_name("bar")
Class: bar
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
TL;DR;
I need to make some ##vars of a static method (extends) in one module visible to a instance method in another module(includes).
How to accomplish that once only setting ##var=value was not enough to make it visible?
Maybe you can just read my capitalized comment bellow and jump to question 4.
Hi, I would like to add an method to my models to index some data in a mysql table with some full text search fields.
In order to accomplish that, I created the following module:
module ElasticFakeIndexing
module IndexingTarget
#instance method to be called on model to get data to save
def build_index_data
{
entity_id: self.id,
entity_type: self.class.name,
#UNABLE TO ACCESS IF SET ONLY WITH ##var=value. Why?
#AND ALMOST SURE THAT USING class_variable_set IS THE CAUSE OF CONFIGURATION OF ONE MODULE MESSING UP WITH ANOTHER'S
title: ##title_fields.collect{|prop| self.send(prop.to_sym)}.join(" || "),
description: ##description_fields.collect{|prop| self.send(prop.to_sym)}.join(" || "),
}
end
def self.included(base)
base.extend ClassMethods
end
module ClassMethods
#class method to declare/call at a given model
def elastic_fake(options = {})
#Make sure we always get an array so we can use 'join'
title_arg = Array(options[:title])
ElasticFakeIndexing::IndexingTarget.class_variable_set(:##title_fields, title_arg)
description_arg = Array(options[:description])
ElasticFakeIndexing::IndexingTarget.class_variable_set(:##description_fields, description_arg)
extra_arg = Array(options[:extra])
ElasticFakeIndexing::IndexingTarget.class_variable_set(:##extra_args, extra_arg)
end
end
end
end
And I use it this way at my models:
class SomeModel < ApplicationRecord
#includes the module
include ElasticFakeIndexing::IndexingTarget
...
# 'static' method call to configure to all classes of this model
elastic_fake(title: "prop_a", description: ["prop_b", "prop_c", "prop_d"])
end
And at some point of my code something like this will be called:
index_data = some_model_instance.build_index_data
save_on_mysql_text_search_fields(index_data)
But I got some problems. And have some questions:
when I use/include my module in a second model, looks like the configuration of one model is being visible to the other. And I got 'invalid fields' like errors. I guess it happens because of this, for example:
ElasticFakeIndexing::IndexingTarget.class_variable_set(:##title_fields, title_arg)
But I got to this this because only set ##title_fields wasn't enough to make title_fields visible at build_index_data instance method. Why?
Why using only #title_fields isn't enough too to make it visible at build_index_data?
How to design it in a way that the set of fields are set in a 'static' variable for each model, and visible inside the instance method build_index_data? Or as a possible solution, the fields could live in a instance variable and be visible. But I think it should live in a 'static' variable because the fields will not change from one instance of the model to another...
Any thoughts? What am I missing about the variables scopes/visibility?
Thank you
Read the following articles on Ruby variables:
Ruby Variable Scope
Understanding Scope in Ruby
quick reminder: ##title_fields, class variable, must be initialized at creation time, while #title_fields, instance variable, hasn't such requirement.
Instead of relying on class variables I recommend using class side instance variables. Class variables will easily be overwritten between individual models including the module. Class side instance variables however are save.
Using some of the syntactic sugar (namely concern and class_attribute) rails offers you could write something like
module ElasticFakeIndexing
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
included do
class_attribute :title_fields,
:description_fields,
:extra_args
end
class_methods do
def elastic_fake(options = {})
...
self.title_fields = Array(options[:title])
...
end
end
def build_index_data
...
title: self.class.title_fields ...
...
end
end
In a Rails controller you can pass a symbol to the layout method that corresponds to a method in you controller that will return the layout name like this:
layout :my_method
def my_method
'layout_1'
end
I want to have a similar functionality to likewise pass a symbol to my classes method and that class should call the corresponding function and use its return value, like this
myClass.foo :my_method
def my_method
'layout_1'
end
I've read posts[1] that tell me I need to pass
myClass.foo(method(:my_method))
which I find ugly and inconvenient. How is rails here different allowing to pass just the symbol without any wrapper? Can this be achieved like Rails does it?
[1] How to implement a "callback" in Ruby?
If you want to only pass a :symbol into the method, then you have to make assumptions about which method named :symbol is the one you want called for you. Probably it's either defined in the class of the caller, or some outer scope. Using the binding_of_caller gem, we can snag that information easily and evaluate the code in that context.
This surely has security implications, but those issues are up to you! :)
require 'binding_of_caller'
class Test
def foo(sym)
binding.of_caller(1).eval("method(:#{sym})").call
end
end
class Other
def blork
t = Test.new
p t.foo(:bar)
p t.foo(:quxx)
end
def bar
'baz'
end
end
def quxx
'quxx'
end
o = Other.new
o.blork
> "baz"
> "quxx"
I still don't understand, what is author asking about. He's saying about "callbacks", but only wrote how he wants to pass parameter to some method. What that method(foo) should do - i have no idea.
So I tried to predict it's implementation. On class initialising it gets the name of method and create private method, that should be called somewhere under the hood. It possible not to create new method, but store method name in class variable and then call it somewhere.
module Foo
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
module ClassMethods
def foo(method_name)
define_method :_foo do
send method_name
end
end
end
end
class BaseClass
include Foo
end
class MyClass < BaseClass
foo :my_method
private
def my_method
"Hello world"
end
end
MyClass.new.send(:_foo)
#=> "Hello world"
And really, everything is much clearer when you're not just wondering how it works in rails, but viewing the source code: layout.rb
Let's say I have a model called Article:
class Article < ActiveRecord::Base
end
And then I have a class that is intended to add behavior to an article object (a decorator):
class ArticleDecorator
def format_title
end
end
If I wanted to extend behavior of an article object, I could make ArticleDecorator a module and then call article.extend(ArticleDecorator), but I'd prefer something like this:
article = ArticleDecorator.decorate(Article.top_articles.first) # for single object
or
articles = ArticleDecorator.decorate(Article.all) # for collection of objects
How would I go about implementing this decorate method?
What exactly do you want from decorate method? Should it simply add some new methods to passed objects or it should automatically wrap methods of these objects with corresponding format methods? And why do you want ArticleDecorator to be a class and not just a module?
Updated:
Seems like solution from nathanvda is what you need, but I'd suggest a bit cleaner version:
module ArticleDecorator
def format_title
"#{title} [decorated]"
end
def self.decorate(object_or_objects_to_decorate)
object_or_objects_to_decorate.tap do |objects|
Array(objects).each { |obj| obj.extend ArticleDecorator }
end
end
end
It does the same thing, but:
Avoids checking type of the arguments relying on Kernel#Array method.
Calls Object#extend directly (it's a public method so there's no need in invoking it through send).
Object#extend includes only instance methods so we can put them right in ArticleDecorator without wrapping them with another module.
May I propose a solution which is not using Module mixins and thereby granting you more flexibility. For example, using a solution a bit more like the traditional GoF decorator, you can unwrap your Article (you can't remove a mixin if it is applied once) and it even allows you to exchange the wrapped Article for another one in runtime.
Here is my code:
class ArticleDecorator < BasicObject
def self.[](instance_or_array)
if instance_or_array.respond_to?(:to_a)
instance_or_array.map {|instance| new(instance) }
else
new(instance_or_array)
end
end
attr_accessor :wrapped_article
def initialize(wrapped_article)
#wrapped_article = wrapped_article
end
def format_title
#wrapped_article.title.upcase
end
protected
def method_missing(method, *arguments)
#wrapped_article.method(method).call(*arguments)
end
end
You can now extend a single Article by calling
extended_article = ArticleDecorator[article]
or multiple articles by calling
articles = [article_a, article_b]
extended_articles = ArticleDecorator[articles]
You can regain the original Article by calling
extended_article.wrapped_article
Or you can exchange the wrapped Article inside like this
extended_article = ArticleDecorator[article_a]
extended_article.format_title
# => "FIRST"
extended_article.wrapped_article = article_b
extended_article.format_title
# => "SECOND"
Because the ArticleDecorator extends the BasicObject class, which has almost no methods already defined, even things like #class and #object_id stay the same for the wrapped item:
article.object_id
# => 123
extended_article = ArticleDecorator[article]
extended_article.object_id
# => 123
Notice though that BasicObject exists only in Ruby 1.9 and above.
You'd extend the article class instance, call alias_method, and point it at whatever method you want (although it sounds like a module, not a class, at least right now). The new version gets the return value and processes it like normal.
In your case, sounds like you want to match up things like "format_.*" to their respective property getters.
Which part is tripping you up?
module ArticleDecorator
def format_title
"Title: #{title}"
end
end
article = Article.top_articles.first.extend(ArticleDecorator) # for single object
Should work fine.
articles = Article.all.extend(ArticleDecorator)
May also work depending on ActiveRecord support for extending a set of objects.
You may also consider using ActiveSupport::Concern.
Background here.
In the above link, the following example is given:
class << self
def by_author(author)
where(:author_id => author.id)
end
end
Aside from that syntax being foreign to a beginner like me — I had always thought class methods were defined with def self.my_class_method — where can I find documentation about class methods in Ruby on Rails?
As far as I know, class methods are always called on the class itself (MyClass.my_class_method), but if class methods in Rails are chainable, it seems as though something else must be going on here!
Edit:
I suppose I sort of cheated by making that comment about the syntax for class methods. I'm really asking how Rails makes a class method chainable — I understand how method chaining works, but not how Rails can allow you to chain class methods without actually returning the class object itself after each "link" in the chain.
Class methods in Ruby are really just members of the singleton class, and doing class << self involves opening the singleton class directly and adding to it, removing the need to declare it in each method definition.
This article on Ruby singletons does a good job explaining.
As far as class methods being chainable, that isn't something specific to class methods, the second method call is simply called on the object returned from the first. For example:
bar = foo.do_something.do_more
is equivalent to:
tmp = foo.do_something
bar = tmp.do_more
In Rails, this chainability is most often used for building SQL queries (e.g., with where or order, etc.). This is achieved because each of these methods returns an ActiveRecord Relation.
The reason
foo.scoped.my_foo_class_method
works is because of ActiveRecord::Relation#method_missing doing the following:
elsif #klass.respond_to?(method)
scoping { #klass.send(method, *args, &block) }
Which checks if the ActiveRecord class responds to the method called, and if so, calls that.
Having class << self is also another way to define your methods so that you do not have to call "def self.my_method" or "def MyClass.my_method" for every single method that you are defining as a class method. Instead of calling
def self.my_method1
end
def self.my_method2
end
class << self
def my_method1
end
def my_method2
end
end
Cheers!
The following two bits of code are equivalent.
Using self.method:
class Hello
def self.world
puts "Hello, World!"
end
end
Using class << self:
class Hello
class << self
def world
puts "Hello, World!"
end
end
end
The only difference is readability, as well as the ease in refactoring.
The class << self technique is often used when metaprogramming.
There is another thread that explains this. class << self vs self.method with Ruby: what's better?