InfoQ

InfoQ

News

My Bookmarks

Login or Register to enable bookmarks for unlimited time.

The content has been bookmarked!

There was an error bookmarking this content! Please retry.

Ruby 1.9 with Symbol#to_proc and (soon) curried Procs

Posted by Werner Schuster on Feb 26, 2008

Sections
Development,
Architecture & Design
Topics
Ruby ,
Language ,
Programming
Tags
Languages ,
Ruby1.9 ,
Language Features
Next to Ruby 1.9's big new features such as threading changes or Fibers, it also added a host of smaller utility functions to the standard library. We already mentioned the Object.tap method, which adds a convenient way of spying on chained method calls.

Similarly to the tap method, the idea for the to_proc has been known in the Ruby community for some time - the feature is also available for pre-1.9 Ruby versions. Ruby 1.9 simply integrates this into the class Symbol, making the behavior available without any supporting libraries.

Reg Braithwaite gives a quick introduction to how to_proc makes code like (1..100).inject(&:+) work:
The & operator converts Proc objects into blocks and block into Proc objects. In this case, it tries to convert the symbol :+ into a block. The conversion uses Ruby's built-in coercion mechanism. That mechanism checks to see whether we have a Proc object. If not, it sends the #to_proc method to the argument to make a Proc. If the Symbol :+ has a #to_proc method, it will be called. In Ruby 1.9 it has a #to_proc method. That method returns a Proc that takes its first argument and sends the + method to it along with any other arguments that may be present.
So, &:+ really means { |x, y| x + y }.
This beheavior can be seen with code like this.:
plus = :+.to_proc
puts plus.call(1,2) # prints '3'
Since the class Symbol has the to_proc method, this approach works for every symbol:
to_s = :to_s.to_proc
to_s.call(42) # results in the string "42"

The implementation of to_proc is simple. Dave Thomas (PragDave) shows how it works:
def to_proc
 proc { |obj, *args| obj.send(self, *args) }
end
It creates a Proc which, when called on an object, sends that object the symbol itself. So, when names.map(&:upcase) starts to iterate over the strings in names, it'll call the block, passing in the first name and invoking its upcase method.

While the feature might yield very succinct code, one question still remains: does this improve the readibility of code? The answer to this has probably changed with the addition of to_proc to standard Ruby 1.9, simply because the Symbol now always comes with to_proc.
 Previously, the availability of the method depended on whether some code or library had opened Symbol and added it. Also: understanding the code involved knowledge of the general Symbol#to_proc idiom, which in Ruby 1.9 has been officially added, and is now more likely to be mentioned in documentation.

This still leaves the question:
 (1..100).map(&:to_s) 
Vs.
 (1..100).map{|x| x.to_s } 
Saving five characters (for this example) - is it worth the extra complexity or not?

Another feature involving Procs has been added to Ruby 1.9 - albeit only in a very recent revision: Proc#curry. A recent ruby-core discussion shows what Proc#curry does:
 It's not difficult at all,
 proc {|x, y, z| x + y + z }.curry
 returns the proc object equivalent to
 proc {|x| proc {|y| proc {|z| x + y + z } } }

The name of this method stems from the concept of Currying, which:
[..] is the technique of transforming a function that takes multiple arguments into a function that takes a single argument (the other arguments having been specified by the curry).
In other words: using currying, a Proc that takes x arguments, can be called with a single argument. Since, obviously, it can't return the result of it's code - it's missing arguments required to run the code - it returns a new Proc that takes (x - 1) arguments. Once this has been repeated enough times so the resulting Proc has all the arguments it needs, the code is evaluated and the result returned.

An example what this can be used for from the same ruby-core thread:
plus_five = proc { |x,y,z| x + y + z }.curry.call(2).call(3) 
plus_five[10] #=> 15
Note: plus_five is a Proc - the [] operator for Proc is overloaded to invoke the Proc.

Caution: Proc#curry is a very recent addition to Ruby 1.9 - to try it, you'll have to use a recent revision.

No comments

Watch Thread Reply

Educational Content

10 tips on how to prevent business value risk

One category of risk that project teams need to ensure they address is business value failure – delivering a product that fails to provide value for the business investor.

Interview: Software Systems Architecture: Working With Stakeholders Using Viewpoints and Perspectives

InfoQ spoke to the authors of Software Systems Architecture on a couple of new topics, the System Context viewpoint and Agile, which have been added to the second edition.

Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beholder

Alex Papadimoulis discusses ugly code, where it comes from, how to avoid it, and how to get rid of it.

Architecting Visa for Massive Scale and Continuous Innovation

John Davies examines Visa’s architecture and shows how enterprises have architected complex integrations incorporating Hadoop, memcached, Ruby on Rails, and others to deliver innovative solutions.

Max Protect: Scalability and Caching at ESPN.com

Sean Comerford unveils ESPN.com’s architecture, what components are used and why, and the current changes the website goes through.

The Seven Deadly Sins of Enterprise Agile Adoption

Are there repeated patterns of failure on Enterprise Agile Enablement efforts? Sanjiv and Arlen discuss Seven Deadly Sins to avoid when adopting Agile in an enterprise.

Questions for an Enterprise Architect

Erik Dörnenburg answers: What is Enterprise and Evolutionary Architecture?, discussing 4 issues: Turning strategy into execution, Ensuring conformance, Where do the architects sit? Buying or building?

Wrap Your SQL Head Around Riak MapReduce

Sean Cribbs explains what Map-Reduce and Riak are, why and how to use Map-Reduce with Riak, and how to convert SQL queries into their Map-Reduce equivalents.