Wrapping an object with methods from another class - ruby-on-rails

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.

Related

Add method to a class which can only be accessed inside specific class

I have a class in initializers in which I use Hash class and I would like to add 2 methods to Hash class. I know how to add methods to the class but I don't want to make the Hash class "dirty".
Is there a way that I can extend the Hash class with those two methods but only inside the class where I use them?
You could use refinements for this:
Due to Ruby's open classes you can redefine or add functionality to existing classes. This is called a “monkey patch”. Unfortunately the scope of such changes is global. All users of the monkey-patched class see the same changes. This can cause unintended side-effects or breakage of programs.
Refinements are designed to reduce the impact of monkey patching on other users of the monkey-patched class. Refinements provide a way to extend a class locally. Refinements can modify both classes and modules.
Something like this:
module HashPatches
refine Hash do
def new_hash_method
# ...
end
end
end
and then:
class YourClass
using HashPatches
def m
{}.new_hash_method
end
end
That would let you call YourClass.new.m (which would use new_hash_method) but it wouldn't pollute Hash globally so outside YourClass, some_hash.new_hash_method would be a NoMethodError.
Reading:
Official Refinements docs
Refinements spec
A less hacky way could be to use SimpleDelegator.
class Foo
class SuperHash < SimpleDelegator
def new_method
# do something with hash
# you can use __getobj__() or super
end
end
private_constant :SuperHash
def initialize
#hash = SuperHash.new({})
end
end
https://ruby-doc.org/stdlib-2.5.1/libdoc/delegate/rdoc/SimpleDelegator.html

Ruby variables visibility inside modules

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

access custom helper in model

I've written a little helper method in my ApplicationController like this:
helper_method :dehumanize
def dehumanize (string)
string.parameterize.underscore
end
Now I would like to use it in one of my model files, but it seems not to be available there.
I tried also with:
ApplicationController.dehumanize(title)
in the model but it doesn't work.
any clue on how to make it work there?
thanks,
Models generally can't/don't/shouldn't access methods in controllers (MVC conventions), but the method you've written doesn't necessarily belong in a controller anyway - it would be better as an extension to the string class.
I would suggest you write an initializer to add dehumanize to String:
\config\initializers\string_dehumanize.rb
class String
def dehumanize
self.parameterize.underscore
end
end
You will need to restart your server/console but then you can call .dehumanize on any string:
some model:
def some_method
string1 = 'testing_the_method'
string1.dehumanize
end
Matt's answer is totally right, but to give you some clarification, you want to make sure that you're calling your methods on objects / instances, rather than classes themselves
For example, you mentioned you tried this:
ApplicationController.dehumanize(title)
This will never work because it's calling a method on a class which is not initialized, not to mention the class doesn't have that method. Basically, what will you expect if you called this method?
The way to do it is to use the method Matt recommended, or use a class method on your model itself, which will allow you to call the model's method directly:
#app/models/model.rb
class Model < ActiveRecord::Base
def self.dehumanize string
string.parameterize.underscore
end
end
# -> Model.dehumanize title

Rails: Passing Variables from a Class Method to an Instance Method

I have several models that share a concern. Each model passes in a hash, which is meant to handle minor differences in the way they use the concern. I pass the hash in through a class method like so:
add_update_to :group, :user
The full code for the concern is:
module Updateable
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
attr_accessor :streams
module ClassMethods
def add_updates_to(*streams)
#streams = streams
end
end
module InstanceMethods
def update_streams
#streams.collect{|stream| self.public_send(stream)}
end
end
included do
has_one :update, :as => :updatable
after_create :create_update_and_history
end
private
def create_update_and_history
update = self.create_update(:user_id => User.current.id)
self.update_streams.each do |stream|
stream.histories.create(:update_id => update.id)
end
end
end
Most of this code works, but I'm having trouble passing the hash from the class to an instance. At the moment, I'm trying to achieve this effect by creating a virtual attribute, passing the hash to the attribute, and then retrieving it in the instance. Not only does this feel hacky, it doesn't work. I'm assuming it doesn't work because #streams is an instance variable, so the class method add_update_to can't actually set it?
Whatever the case, is there a better way to approach this problem?
You could probably use class variables here, but those are pretty reviled in the Ruby community due to their unpredictable nature. The thing to remember is that classes in Ruby are actually also instances of classes, and can have their own instance variables that are only accessible to themselves, and not accessible to their instances (if that is in any way clear).
In this case, you are defining behavior, and not data, so I think neither instance nor class variables are appropriate. Instead, I think your best bet is to define the instance methods directly within the class method, like this:
module Updateable
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
module ClassMethods
def add_updates_to(*streams)
define_method :update_streams do
streams.collect {|stream| public_send(stream) }
end
end
end
end
BTW, there is no hash involved here, so I'm not sure what you were referring to. *streams collects your arguments into an Array.

Class methods in Ruby on Rails 3 — I'm totally lost!

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?

Resources