Create variables with caller scope

[Jari Williamsson]

Is it possible for a method to create new variables that becomes in the
scope of the caller (instead of the scope of the method)? I guess I mean
to get a method to behave much like macros or templates in C/C++.

Something like this:
---
def create_some_variables(varname1, varname2)
# Create the variables and initialize with values
end

create_some_variables("a", "b")
# Display the values of those variables
puts a
puts b

 

[Jean-François Trân]

Jari Williamsson :

Is it possible for a method to create new variables that
becomes in the scope of the caller (instead of the scope
of the method)? I guess I mean to get a method to behave
much like macros or templates in C/C++.

Why not using a block ?

Something like this:

def create_some_variables(*args)
# Create object_1 and object_2 and initialize with values
# ...
# pass them to the block
yield object_1, object_2 if block_given?
end

create_some_variables("a", "b")
# Display the values of those variables
puts a
puts b

create_some_variables(...) do |a,b|
# Display the values of those variables
puts a
puts b

# do something with a and b
# ...
end

-- Jean-Fran=E7ois.

 

[Jari Williamsson]

Jari Williamsson :

Why not using a block ?

Because the created variables will "only" get block scope, if I
understand your sample code correctly. And calling the
create_some_variables() multiple times would create multiple stacked blocks.

But giving it a bit more thought, I think I should redesign the code a
bit and let the method instead dynamically create a class where all the
created variables are stored and then returned an instance of that class.


Best regards,

Jari Williamsson

 

[Robert Klemme]

Because the created variables will "only" get block scope, if I
understand your sample code correctly. And calling the
create_some_variables() multiple times would create multiple stacked bloc= ks.

But giving it a bit more thought, I think I should redesign the code a
bit and let the method instead dynamically create a class where all the
created variables are stored and then returned an instance of that class.

OpenStruct and Hash come to mind. One of those is usually far better
than the hack you attempted initially. Btw, there is another issue
with this: local variables created dynamically in a scope cannot be
used directly (i.e. the same way as if they were defined in the scope
directly):

$ ruby -e 'def f() eval("x=3D1", binding); p x end; f'
-e:1:in `f': undefined local variable or method `x' for main:Object (NameEr=
ror)
from -e:1
13:35:55 /cygdrive/c/SCMws/RKlemme/OPSC_Gold_bas_dev_R1.2_perf/bas
$ ruby -e 'def f() eval("x=3D1", binding); p(eval("x", binding)) end; f'
1
13:36:27 /cygdrive/c/SCMws/RKlemme/OPSC_Gold_bas_dev_R1.2_perf/bas

So you need to use some name passing mechanism anyway. And if you do
that you can use a Hash immediately which is much easier and clearer.

Kind regards

robert

--=20
use.inject do |as, often| as.you_can - without end