One of my favorite classes in Ruby is Struct, but I feel like many Rubyists
don't know when to take advantage of it. The standard library has a lot of
junk in it, but Struct and OStruct are super awesome.
If you haven't used Struct before, here's the documentation of Struct from
the Ruby standard library.
Structs are used to create super simple classes with some instance variables and a simple constructor. Check it:
Struct.new("Point", :x, :y) #=> Struct::Point
origin = Struct::Point.new(0,0) #=> #<struct Struct::Point x=0, y=0>
Nobody uses it this way, though. Here's the way I first saw it used:
class Point < Struct.new(:x, :y)
end
origin = Point.new(0,0)
Wait, what? Inherit...from an instance of something? Yep!
1.9.3p194 :001 > Struct.new(:x,:y)
=> #<Class:0x007f8fc38da2e8>
Struct.new gives us a Class. We can inherit from this just like any other
Class. Neat!
However, if you're gonna make an empty class like this, I prefer this way:
Point = Struct.new(:x, :y)
origin = Point(0,0)
Yep. Classes are just constants, so we assign a constant to that particular
Class.
OStructs are like Struct on steroids. Check it:
require 'ostruct'
origin = OpenStruct.new
origin.x = 0
origin.y = 0
origin = OpenStruct.new(:x => 0, :y => 0)
OStructs are particularly good for configuration objects. Since any method
works to set data in an OStruct, you don't have to worry about enumerating
every single option that you need:
require 'ostruct'
def set_options
opts = OpenStruct.new
yield opts
opts
end
options = set_options do |o|
o.set_foo = true
o.load_path = "whatever:something"
end
options #=> #<OpenStruct set_foo=true, load_path="whatever:something">
Neat, eh?
You can use Structs to help reify domain concepts into simple little classes.
For example, say we have this code, which uses a date:
class Person
attr_accessor :name, :day, :month, :year
def initialize(opts = {})
@name = opts[:name]
@day = opts[:day]
@month = opts[:month]
@year = opts[:year]
end
def birthday
"#@day/#@month/#@year"
end
end
and we have this spec
$:.unshift("lib")
require 'person'
describe Person do
it "compares birthdays" do
joe = Person.new(:name => "Joe", :day => 5, :month => 6, :year => 1986)
jon = Person.new(:name => "Jon", :day => 7, :month => 6, :year => 1986)
joe.birthday.should == jon.birthday
end
end
It fails, of course. Like this:
$ rspec
F
Failures:
1) Person compares birthdays
Failure/Error: joe.birthday.should == jon.birthday
expected: "7/6/1986"
got: "5/6/1986" (using ==)
# ./spec/person_spec.rb:9:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>'
Finished in 0.00053 seconds
1 example, 1 failure
Failed examples:
rspec ./spec/person_spec.rb:5 # Person compares birthdays
Now. We have these two birthdays. In this case, we know about why the test was failing, but imagine this failure in a real codebase. Are these month/day/year or day/month/year? You can't tell, it could be either. If we switched our code to this:
class Person
attr_accessor :name, :birthday
Birthday = Struct.new(:day, :month, :year)
def initialize(opts = {})
@name = opts[:name]
@birthday = Birthday.new(opts[:day], opts[:month], opts[:year])
end
end
We get this failure instead:
$ rspec
F
Failures:
1) Person compares birthdays
Failure/Error: joe.birthday.should == jon.birthday
expected: #<struct Person::Birthday day=7, month=6, year=1986>
got: #<struct Person::Birthday day=5, month=6, year=1986> (using ==)
Diff:
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
-#<struct Person::Birthday day=7, month=6, year=1986>
+#<struct Person::Birthday day=5, month=6, year=1986>
# ./spec/person_spec.rb:9:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>'
Finished in 0.00092 seconds
1 example, 1 failure
Failed examples:
rspec ./spec/person_spec.rb:5 # Person compares birthdays
We have a way, way more clear failure. We can clearly see that its our days that are off.
Of course, there are other good reasons to package related instance variables
into Structs, too: it makes more conceptual sense. This code represents our
intent better: a Person has a Birthday, they don't have three unrelated numbers
stored inside them somehow. If we need to add something to our concept of
birthdays, we now have a place to put it.