I am trying to accomplish the following in Ruby:
person_struct = StructWithType.new "Person",
:name => String,
:age => Fixnum,
:money_into_bank_account => Float
And I would like it to accept both:
person_struct.new "Some Name",10,100000.0
and
person_struct.new "Some Name","10","100000.0"
That is, I'd like it to do data conversion stuff automatically.
I know Ruby is dinamically and I should not care about data types but this kind of conversion would be handy.
What I am asking is something similar to ActiveRecord already does: convert String to thedatatype defined in the table column.
After searching into ActiveModel I could not figure out how to to some TableLess that do this conversion.
After all I think my problem may require much less that would be offered by ActiveModel modules.
Of course I could implement a class by myself that presents this conversion feature, but I would rather know this has not yet been done in order to not reinvent the wheel.
Tks in advance.
I think that the implementation inside a class is so easy, and there is no overhead at all, so I don't see the reason to use StructWithType at all. Ruby is not only dynamic, but very efficient in storing its instances. As long as you don't use an attribute, there is none.
The implementation in a class should be:
def initialize(name, age, money_into_bank_account)
self.name = name
self.age = age.to_i
self.money_into_bank_account = money_into_bank_account.to_f
end
The implementation in StructWithType would then be one layer higher:
Implement for each type a converter.
Bind an instance of that converter in the class.
Use in the new implementation of StructWithType instances (not class) the converters of the class to do the conversion.
A very first sketch of it could go like that:
class StructWithType
def create(args*)
<Some code to create new_inst>
args.each_with_index do |arg,index|
new_value = self.converter[index].convert(arg)
new_inst[argname[index]]= new_value
end
end
end
The ideas here are:
You have an instance method named create that creates from the factory a new struct instance.
The factory iterates through all args (with the index) and searches for each arg the converter to use.
It converts the arg with the converter.
It stores in the new instance at the argname (method argname[] has to be written) the new value.
So you have to implement the creation of the struct, the lookup for converter, the lookup for the argument name and the setter for the attributes of the new instance. Sorry, no more time today ...
I have used create because new has a different meaning in Ruby, I did not want to mess this up.
I have found a project in github that fulfill some of my requirements: ActiveHash.
Even though I still have to create a class for each type but the type conversion is free.
I am giving it a try.
Usage example:
class Country < ActiveHash::Base
self.data = [
{:id => 1, :name => "US"},
{:id => 2, :name => "Canada"}
]
end
country = Country.new(:name => "Mexico")
country.name # => "Mexico"
country.name? # => true
Related
I am trying to build a ruby on rails and graphQL app, and am working on a user update mutation. I have spent a long time trying to figure it out, and when I accidentally made a typo, it suddenly worked.
The below is the working migration:
module Mutations
class UpdateUser < BaseMutation
argument :id, Int
argument :first_name, String
argument :last_name, String
argument :username, String
argument :email, String
argument :password, String
field :user, Types::User
field :errors, [String], null: false
def resolve(id:, first_name:, last_name:, username:, email:, password:)
user = User.find(id)
user.update(first_name:, last_name:, username:, email:, password:)
{ user:, errors: [] }
rescue StandardError => e
{ user: nil, errors: [e.message] }
end
end
end
The thing I am confused about is when I define the arguments, they are colon first: eg :id or :first_name
When I pass them to the resolve method they only work if they have the colon after: eg id: or first_name:
When I pass the variables to the update method, they use the same syntax of colon after, for all variables other than ID. For some reason, when I used id: it was resolving to a string "id", and using colon first :id was returning an undefined error.
It is only when I accidentally deleted the colon, and tried id that it actually resolved to the passed through value.
My question for this, is why and how this is behaving this way? I have tried finding the answer in the docs, and reading other posts, but have been unable to find an answer.
Please someone help my brain get around this, coming from a PHP background, ruby is melting my brain.
It's going to take some time to get used to Ruby, coming from PHP, but it won't be too bad.
Essentially id is a variable, or object/model attribute when used like model_instance.id. In PHP this would be like $id or $object_instance->id.
When you see id: it is the key in a key-value pair, so it expects something (a value) after it (or assumes nil if nothing follows, often in method definitions using keyword arguments like your example). A typical use might be model_instance.update(id: 25) where you are essentially passing in a hash to the update method with id as the key and 25 as the value. The older way to write this in Ruby is with a "hash rocket" like so: model_instance.update(:id => 25).
More reading on Ruby hashes: https://www.rubyguides.com/2020/05/ruby-hash-methods
More reading on keyword arguments: https://www.rubyguides.com/2018/06/rubys-method-arguments
Now if you're paying attention that hash rocket now uses the 3rd type you're asking about. When you see a colon preceding a string like that it is called a "symbol" and it will take some time to get used to them but they are essentially strings in Ruby that are one character fewer to define (and immutable). Instead of using 'id' or "id" as a string, Ruby folks often like to use :id as a symbol and it will typically auto-convert to a string when needed. A good example might be an enumerator of sorts.
state = :ready
if state == :ready
state = :finished
else
state = :undefined
end
More reading on Ruby symbols: https://www.rubyguides.com/2018/02/ruby-symbols
I'm trying to map an array of custom values using a constant that's already defined. I'm running into some problems.
This works perfectly:
Car.where(brand: car_brands.map(&:Car_honda))
Although I have all the car brands already defined in my file, so I would prefer to use the constants over rewriting the names. For example:
HONDA = "Car_honda"
When I try and map this constant to the array it doesn't seem to work properly:
Car.where(brand: car_brands.map(&:HONDA))
I tried to use a block with map, but I still got the same result:
Car.where(brand: car_brands.map {|c| c.HONDA}))
Are we able to use constants with map?
Just use send:
Car.where(brand: car_brands.map { |c| c.send(HONDA) })
I'm not sure where you're going with this, or precisely where you're coming from, but here's an example that follows Rails conventions:
class Brand < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :cars
end
class Car < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :brand
end
Then you can find all cars associated with the "Honda" brand:
Brand.find_by(name: 'Honda').cars
Or find all cars matching one or more arbitrary brand names using a JOIN operation:
Car.joins(:brand).where(brand: { name: %w[ Honda Ford ] })
If you go with the flow in Rails things are a lot easier.
Are you able to use constants with map?
Nope. Not like this, anyhow.
car_brands.map { |c| c.HONDA }
This means, for every thing in car_brands call method HONDA on it and return results of the invocations. So, unless you have method HONDA defined (which you absolutely shouldn't), this has no chance to work.
Constants are defined on the class, not on the object. You can invoke them through .class.
:005 > Integer.const_set('ABC', 1)
=> 1
:006 > Integer::ABC
=> 1
:007 > [1,2,3].map {|i| i.class::ABC}
=> [1, 1, 1]
This will not work for your use case unless car_brands contains an array of different Car classes.
First off, you probably don't want to things this way. Perhaps it's the way your example is worded, but the only way it makes sense, as I'm reading it, is if Car_brands is an array of classes. And if that's the case, if doesn't make sense to have a constant called HONDA. If anything, you would have a constant called BRAND that might equal "Honda" for a given class. I strongly recommend you rethink your data structures before moving forward.
All that said, you can use const_get to access constants using map. e.g.
class CarBrand1
BRAND = 'Honda'
end
class CarBrand2
BRAND = 'Toyota'
end
car_brands = [CarBrand1, CarBrand2]
car_brands.map{|car_brand| car_brand.const_get("BRAND")}
car_brands.map{|car_brand| car_brand::BRAND} # Alternatively
# => ["Honda", "Toyota"]
I have a DI routine where I have a large csv I'm importing with known column format. I first set up a column map:
col_map =
{
4 => :name,
6 => :description,
21 => :in_stock,
...
I then read each line in, and then using the column map, attempt to set the attribute:
i = Item.new
col_map.each do |k,v|
i[v] = chunks[k] #chunks is the line read in split by the delimiter
In my item declaration, I declare two attributes, b/c these are not stored in the database, they're used for other logic:
attr_writer :in_stock
attr_writer :end_date
When the code gets to this line:
i[v] = chunks[k]
I get this message:
X.DEPRECATION WARNING: You're trying to create an attribute `in_stock'. Writing arbitrary attributes on a model is deprecated. Please just use `attr_writer`
But I'm not trying to create an attribute, and I am using attr_writer. I suspect this has something to do with the [] I'm using instead of . for the lvalue.
Can anyone see what I'm doing wrong?
Thanks for any help,
Kevin
Admittedly, the deprecation wording is slightly confusing, but you're seeing this warning because the model[attribute_name] = ... style is only supported for ActiveRecord attributes on the model, not non-persisted attributes added with attr_writer.
You can see the code that produces the warning over here.
To address this I'd use send which will work for all attributes e.g.
i.send("#{v}=", chunks[k])
I think the best way for me to explain this question is with example. Here is a simple method with a hash:
def getValues(table)
allColumns = {
'User' => ['first_name', 'last_name'],
'Vehicle' => ['make', 'model', 'id'],
}
end
I am trying to pass in the table and based on that table return a range of values. I would like to know what would be (performance-wise) the best way to accomplish this. Is it using a switch statement, if/else, some sort of loop? If you come up with an answer, please be as kind to include an example so that I may understand better.
I suggest you to rename the parameter first, maybe to table_name or something more descriptive.
Second it is kind of a convention in ruby to use method names separated by _, and avoid using camelCase as another languages.
Third, i would put the list on a constant variable or something, and just reference it inside the method.
Then you can look up the values of some hash based on a key just by using hash[key].
LIST = {
'User' => ['first_name', 'last_name'],
'Vehicle' => ['make', 'model', 'id'],
}
def get_values(table_name)
LIST[table_name]
end
Hash lookup by key is probably one of the most performant operations you could do with a collection, so there is no need to worry about it.
I've been trying to come up with a way to declare array constants in a class, and then present the members of the arrays as grouped options in a select control. The reason I am using array constants is because I do not want the options being backed by a database model.
This can be done in the basic sense rather easily using the grouped_collection_select view helper. What is not so straightforward is making this localizable, while keeping the original array entries in the background. In other words, I want to display the options in whatever locale, but I want the form to submit the original array values.
Anyway, I've come up with a solution, but it seems overly complex. My question is: is there a better way? Is a complex solution required, or have I overlooked a much easier solution?
I'll explain my solution using a contrived example. Let's start with my model class:
class CharacterDefinition < ActiveRecord::Base
HOBBITS = %w[bilbo frodo sam merry pippin]
DWARVES = %w[gimli gloin oin thorin]
##TYPES = nil
def CharacterDefinition.TYPES
if ##TYPES.nil?
hobbits = TranslatableString.new('hobbits', 'character_definition')
dwarves = TranslatableString.new('dwarves', 'character_definition')
##TYPES = [
{ hobbits => HOBBITS.map {|c| TranslatableString.new(c, 'character_definition')} },
{ dwarves => DWARVES.map {|c| TranslatableString.new(c, 'character_definition')} }
]
end
##TYPES
end
end
The TranslatableString class does the translation:
class TranslatableString
def initialize(string, scope = nil)
#string = string;
#scope = scope
end
def to_s
#string
end
def translate
I18n.t #string, :scope => #scope, :default => #string
end
end
And the view erb statement look like:
<%= f.grouped_collection_select :character_type, CharacterDefinition.TYPES, 'values[0]', 'keys[0].translate', :to_s, :translate %>
With the following yml:
en:
character_definition:
hobbits: Hobbits of the Shire
bilbo: Bilbo Baggins
frodo: Frodo Baggins
sam: Samwise Gamgee
merry: Meriadoc Brandybuck
pippin: Peregrin Took
dwarves: Durin's Folk
gimli: Gimli, son of Glóin
gloin: Glóin, son of Gróin
oin: Óin, son of Gróin
thorin: Thorin Oakenshield, son of Thráin
The result is:
So, have I come up with a reasonable solution? Or have I gone way off the rails?
Thanks!
From the resounding silence my question received in response, I am guessing that there is not a better way. Anyway, the approach works and I am sticking to it until I discover something better.