Feature #6721
closedObject#yield_self
Added by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) about 12 years ago. Updated over 7 years ago.
Description
I think the following method is missing from Ruby:
class Object
def yield_self(*args)
yield(self, *args)
end
end
I do not know a good use case, but it looks very natural to me. It can be used in method chains.
What do you think? Is there an alternative?
Updated by jballanc (Joshua Ballanco) about 12 years ago
How is this significantly different than Object#tap?
Updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) about 12 years ago
It executes the block and returns its output. For example:
2.yield_self { |x| x*x } # => 4
Updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) about 12 years ago
I've come up with some use case for illustration. I have also looked into the Ruby on Rails Object#try
method because it can serve a similar purpose. I think yield_self
is more basic than try
.
Here are two examples of a use case:
attr = object.associated_object.yield_self { |o| o.attribute unless o.nil? }
mailing_address = { :name => person[:name],
:street => person[:address].yield_self { |a| a[:street] if a.is_a?(Hash) }
}
Here is for comparison the implementation of Object#try
in Ruby on Rails:
def try(*a, &b)
if a.empty? && block_given?
yield self
else
__send__(*a, &b)
end
end
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) about 12 years ago
I'm not against the feature itself, but don't like the name.
Updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) about 12 years ago
nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) wrote:
I'm not against the feature itself, but don't like the name.
#yield_to
, #submit_to
, #surrender
, #capitulate
? :)
Or otherwise, #apply
:
2.apply { |x| x*x } # => 4
Updated by drbrain (Eric Hodel) about 12 years ago
Your current names are less clear than using a local variable. Using a local variable reveals your intentions very clearly:
o = object.associated_object
attr = o.attribute if o
It's obvious that attr
is only set if the associated object exists.
For your second example there's just too much going on to clearly see what the intention is. By first separating data gathering from creating of the mailing_address
Hash
things become much clearer:
address = person[:address]
street = address[:street] if address.is_a?(Hash)
mailing_address = {
:name => person[:name],
:street => street,
}
As in the first example, your current names don't reveal what yield_self
is supposed to do in a way that's clearer than using local variables for construction of mailing_address
Updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) about 12 years ago
drbrain (Eric Hodel) wrote:
Your current names are less clear than using a local variable. Using a local variable reveals your intentions very clearly:
Well, using method chains with blocks is always less clear than using local variables, i think.
Updated by trans (Thomas Sawyer) about 12 years ago
This is basically #ergo in Ruby Facets. Essentially:
def ergo
return yield(self) if block_given?
self
end
Updated by yhara (Yutaka HARA) almost 12 years ago
- Category set to core
- Target version set to 2.6
Updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) almost 12 years ago
After commenting on #6284, i have a new proposition for this method's name: Object#^
. Also, i suggest to allow it to take a block, a proc, a lambda, or a symbol. I think this will not conflict with existing uses of #^
, however the classes that implement it for certain argument types should not forget to call super
if the argument type is not recognized by them.
For example:
# Formatting a string:
format_as_title = lambda { |str| "Title: #{ str.strip.capitalize }" }
title = "something to be a title" ^ format_as_title # instead of `format_as_title["something to be a title"]`
# Squaring the 2:
four = 2 ^ { |x| x*x } # instead of `four = 2 * 2`
# Converting a string to an integer:
five = "5" ^ :to_i # instead of `five = "5".to_i`
This is consistent with a rare mathematical notation for function application: sometimes instead of "f(x)", the "exponential" notation "x^f" is used.
This would also open a door to compose lambdas from left to right, if the majority decides so (this is being discussed in #6284)
Updated by Anonymous over 11 years ago
#ergo is a well-thought method name, I like it better than all others.
Updated by headius (Charles Nutter) over 11 years ago
It occurs to me #apply is used in some other languages to refer to the elements of a collection rather than to the collection itself.
[1,2,3].apply {|n| puts n}
Did we ever decide if the #self
method would be added? If it were, it would be simple to have it take a block:
four = 2.self {|n| n * n}
That would make #self basically be #ergo as defined by Facets.
Worth noting that you can get nearly as concise syntax today, albeit in reverse order:
four = ->{|n| n * n}.(2)
Updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) over 11 years ago
Here is a "real life" use case. It again has to do with formatting strings.
I want to have a list of conference participants in the form:
Full Name (Affiliation, academic position)
but without empty parentheses or trailing comma if the person has not
provided the affiliation or the position. So i did like this:
class Participant
def full_name_with_affiliation_and_position
full_name +
lambda { |x| x.empty? ? '' : " (#{ x })" }[[affiliation, academic_position].compact.join(', ')]
end
end
(I will appreciate any more elegant solution.)
With #yield_self
(or any other name for it), i would have written:
class Participant
def full_name_with_affiliation_and_position
full_name +
[affiliation, academic_position].compact.join(', ').yield_self { |x| x.empty? ? '' : " (#{ x })" }
end
end
This would be a bit more readable for me.
Edited 2013-02-09.
Updated by Anonymous over 11 years ago
Why you can't simply do the following?
def full_name_with_affiliation_and_position
a_ap = " (#{a_ap})" unless (a_ap = [affiliation, academic_position].compact.join ', ').empty?
"#{full_name}#{a_ap}"
end
Updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) over 11 years ago
Anonymous wrote:
Why you can't simply do the following?
def full_name_with_affiliation_and_position a_ap = " (#{a_ap})" unless (a_ap = [affiliation, academic_position].compact.join ', ').empty? "#{full_name}#{a_ap}" end
I can, but i guess i want it to look more like declarative programming, than like imperative.
Updated by ko1 (Koichi Sasada) over 11 years ago
- Assignee set to matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Updated by aleph1 (Elias Levy) over 11 years ago
nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) wrote:
I'm not against the feature itself, but don't like the name.
At its core this feature relates to method chaining and transforming the object, something that cannot be done with Object#tap.
Some suggested names then: transform, alter, mutate, map, morph.
map may be the best choice, as its already used in enumerables and this is a natural equivalent for single objects. That said, it may lead to unnoticed bugs if someone thinks they are applying a map operation on an enumerable but for some reason they do so against some other object. So maybe one of the other names is better to ensure such cases fail.
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 11 years ago
(13/05/17 17:01), aleph1 (Elias Levy) wrote:
map may be the best choice, as its already used in enumerables and this is a natural equivalent for single objects. That said, it may lead to unnoticed bugs if someone thinks they are applying a map operation on an enumerable but for some reason they do so against some other object. So maybe one of the other names is better to ensure such cases fail.
If it were Kernel#map, which would you expect by {foo: 42}.map {...}
?
Updated by Anonymous over 11 years ago
nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) wrote:
I'm not against the feature itself, but don't like the name.
+1 to this opinion
Updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) about 11 years ago
I have checked if by any chance Haskell had it, apparently it doesn't: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4090168/is-there-an-inverse-of-the-haskell-operator
I have found that in Alonzo Church's "The calculi of lambda-conversion", he uses "[M^N]" (with superscript) as an alternative notation for the "application" of a term N to a term M (in addition to the basic lambda-calculus notation "(NM)").
This operation would roughly correspond to apply
in Scheme with reverse order of arguments. If i understand correctly, the apply
in Scheme roughly corresponds to call
in Ruby, so maybe reverse_call
?
Edited 2013-08-31.
Updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) almost 11 years ago
Another idea for the name: Object#cast
.
class Object
def cast(*args)
if block_given?
yield(self, *args)
else
p = args.pop
unless p.respond_to?(:call)
raise ArgumentError, 'the last argument should be callable when no block is given'
end
p.call(self, *args)
end
end
end
2.cast {|x| x**3 } # => 8
p = proc {|x, y| x**y }
3.cast(2, p) # => 9
Another option: Object#toss
.
Edited 2013-09-01.
Updated by abinoam (Abinoam P. Marques Jr.) almost 11 years ago
May I give a name suggestion?
Does "tap!" make sense in english?
2.tap {|x| x*2 } # => 2
2.tap! {|x| x*2 } # => 4
The exclamation mark alerts that the return value is being changed.
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 8 years ago
- Related to Feature #6688: Object#replace added
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 8 years ago
- Related to deleted (Feature #6688: Object#replace)
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 8 years ago
- Related to Feature #6684: Object#do added
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 8 years ago
- Related to Feature #10095: Object#as added
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 8 years ago
- Has duplicate Feature #11717: Object#trap -- pass object to block and return result added
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 8 years ago
- Related to deleted (Feature #10095: Object#as)
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 8 years ago
- Has duplicate Feature #10095: Object#as added
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 8 years ago
- Description updated (diff)
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) almost 8 years ago
- Has duplicate Feature #12760: Optional block argument for `itself` added
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 7 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Closed
Applied in changeset trunk|r58528.
object.c: Kernel#yield_self
- object.c (rb_obj_yield_self): new method which yields the
receiver and returns the result.
[ruby-core:46320] [Feature #6721]