Feature #18183
closedmake SecureRandom.choose public
Description
This issue https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10849
added SecureRandom.alphanumeric
and also the private method choose.
choose
was kept private because the method name wasn't the best name to represent the behavior.
I think if it was called random_string
it would be very clear what it does.
I also think it should be aliased to choose as well to allow backwards compatibility for people bypassing the private method with send
(e.g. https://www.thetopsites.net/article/58611103.shtml)
I'm planning to put together a pull request for this. Please let me know if there are any complications I'm not considering.
Updated by olleicua (Antha Auciello) about 3 years ago
Pull request here: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/4878
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) about 3 years ago
- Related to Feature #10849: Adding an alphanumeric function to SecureRandom added
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) almost 3 years ago
- Related to Feature #18190: Split `Random::Formatter` from securerandom added
Updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) almost 3 years ago
I agree with the proposal, but choice
is not a good name for a public method.
Matz.
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) over 2 years ago
- Has duplicate Feature #18817: SecureRandom::choose is not being exposed added
Updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) over 2 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Rejected
SecureRandom.choose(*args)
is not intuitive from my POV. Use args.sample(random: SecureRandom)
.
Matz.
Updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) over 2 years ago
My bad. args.sample(random: SecureRandom) is not a replacement for SecureRandom.choose(*args,len).
But still, choose does not describe the behavior.
Matz.
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) over 2 years ago
@matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) The OP proposed random_string
. What do you think about it?
Updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) over 2 years ago
I don't think SecureRandom.random_string(args, len)
describes the behavior, neither.
Matz.
Updated by midnight (Sarun R) over 2 years ago
My bad for not searching the old topics.
In this module, (most of) the method name describes the output, not the procedure, not how to generate the output.
For example:
Method hex
outputs a hexadecimal number.
Method uuid
outputs a uuid.
The problem now is that what do we call this thing:
"5FHY5PXLT184GIVISCVESTMGO"
given that the characters come from a specific input set.
My naive self would call it a string, but it is not just any string; maybe, "string" with some adjective?
Otherwise, what I call straight from my business application is "code".
SecureRandom.code
maybe?
Updated by austin (Austin Ziegler) over 2 years ago
One option would be to extend Random::Formatter#alphanumeric
to have an optional "alphabet":
def alphanumeric(n=nil, alphabet: ALPHANUMERIC)
n = 16 if n.nil?
choose(alphabet, n)
end
Updated by midnight (Sarun R) over 2 years ago
In case we really can't agree on the name.
I reimplement the functionality as an independent class on a GitHub's Gist; without using non-public API and the send
hack, of course.
https://gist.github.com/midnight-wonderer/8fec1c670bd07f26b9466010842d2421
Usage:
code_generator = RandomCode.new(choose_from: ('A'..'Z').to_a)
code_generator.call(10)
It would be better if the functionality is in the core, though.
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) over 2 years ago
austin (Austin Ziegler) wrote in #note-11:
One option would be to extend
Random::Formatter#alphanumeric
to have an optional "alphabet":
This approach looks nice to me. If "numeric" sounds a bit weird here, how about introducing Random::Formatter#alphabet(n = 16, alphabet: [*'A'..'Z', *'a'..'z'])
?
Updated by austin (Austin Ziegler) over 2 years ago
mame (Yusuke Endoh) wrote in #note-13:
austin (Austin Ziegler) wrote in #note-11:
One option would be to extend
Random::Formatter#alphanumeric
to have an optional "alphabet":This approach looks nice to me. If "numeric" sounds a bit weird here, how about introducing
Random::Formatter#alphabet(n = 16, alphabet: [*'A'..'Z', *'a'..'z'])
?
I think that #alphanumeric
might still be the better name as the alphabet could be [*'ABCDFGHKMNPQRTUVWXYZ'.split(''), *'0'..'9']
. If that’s not preferred, there are two choices, I think:
Random::Formatter#alphanumeric(n = 16, set: …)
-
Random::Formatter#from_set(set, n = 16)
(orRandom::Formatter#from_set(n = 16, set: …)
)
I think that alphabet
is still the right word here, as it’s sort of the "term of art" for this sort of thing, although set
is probably a good name as well. In any case, there should be a recommendation that the alphabet
or the set
parameter for any of these be a constant frozen value and not a localized constructed value.
Updated by olleicua (Antha Auciello) over 2 years ago
Random::Formatter#from_set(set, n = 16)
(orRandom::Formatter#from_set(n = 16, set: …)
)
I like Random::Formatter#from_set
or Random::Formatter#from_alphabet
because from
makes it clear what the purpose of the additional parameter is.
Random::Formatter#alphabet
would seem a little confusing to me as it could suggest that a standard a-z
alphabet of some sort is being used.
Updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) over 2 years ago
I prefer Random::Formatter#alphanumeric(n = 16, chars: …)
to others. But alphabet:
or set:
are acceptable too.
Matz.
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) almost 2 years ago
- Status changed from Rejected to Assigned
- Assignee set to nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) about 1 year ago
- Has duplicate Feature #19854: Make SecureRandom.choose public added
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) about 1 year ago
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) about 1 year ago
- Status changed from Assigned to Closed
Applied in changeset git|7e5c662a6f2e8435f8103bc16185bed6759cc557.
[Feature #18183] Add chars:
option to Random#alphanumeric