The first of the parameters passed to the block is the object that is
sent the message designated by the symbol. (Or in other words, the
method designated by the symbol is called on the object that is the
first parameter).
So people.collect(&:name) works because the collect iterator yields a
member of the people enumerable at each pass. Plus that object needs
to have name method. The important part to understand is that any
extra parameters the iterator yields to the block will be passed to
the method. In the above case, there is none, because collect only
yields one member, nothing more. I'll give you an (very-convoluted)
example because it is hard to understand without one:
RND_TOP = 10
class Array
def select_with_random
selected = []
self.each do |e|
selected << e if yield e, rand(RND_TOP)
end
selected
end
end
numbers = Array.new(5) { rand(RND_TOP) }
above = numbers.select_with_random(&:>)
puts "numbers that are above another random number: #{above.inspect}}"
So I added a select iterator to the Fixnum class which not only yields
an element but also a random number. That random number is the extra
parameter that will be passed to the method designated by the symbol,
in this case, >. So iterating through random numbers, it will select
those that are bigger than another random number (no sense at all, I
know). The > method needs one parameter and it gets it.
I am sure that this can have actual, real world uses, too, I just
could not find out something realistic right now.
Balint
On Feb 6, 5:28 pm, Frederick Cheung <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On 6 Feb 2009, at 15:58, Kenneth McDonald wrote:
>
>
>
> > OK, I see how this works now, but I can't figure out how to get extra
> > args in
> > there, i.e. something like [1, 2, 3].collect(&:modulo, 2) doesn't work
> > because
> > it's improper Ruby syntax. I assume there's a reason extra args are
> > allowed,
> > so could someone give a brief illustration of the calling convention?
>
> I don't think you can - you just have to use the longhand syntax in
> those cases.
>
> Fred
>
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Ken
>
> > On Feb 5, 2009, at 6:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >> It is not possible in "plain" ruby because Rails extends the Symbol
> >> class with the possibility of converting it into a Proc (that's what
> >> happens when you precede something with a &). From the Rails source
> >> code:
>
> >> unless :to_proc.respond_to?(:to_proc)
> >> class Symbol
> >> # Turns the symbol into a simple proc, which is especially useful
> >> for enumerations. Examples:
> >> #
> >> # # The same as people.collect { |p| p.name }
> >> # people.collect(&:name)
> >> #
> >> # # The same as people.select { |p| p.manager? }.collect { |p|
> >> p.salary }
> >> # people.select(&:manager?).collect(&:salary)
> >> def to_proc
> >> Proc.new { |*args| args.shift.__send__(self, *args) }
> >> end
> >> end
> >> end
>
> >> And it does come very handy indeed.
> >> Balint
>
> >> On Feb 6, 1:07 am, Kenneth McDonald
> >> <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>> I've seen a claim on the web that &:f is just Ruby shorthand for
> >>> &proc
> >>> { |i| i.f }, but I've certainly never been able to get this &:f
> >>> notation to work in standard ruby.
>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Ken
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
