Is it possible to convert a proc-flavored Proc into a lambda-flavored Proc?
Bit surprised that this doesn't work, at least in 1.9.2:
my_proc = proc {|x| x}
my_lambda = lambda &p
my_lambda.lambda? # => false!
In Ruby, a lambda is an object similar to a proc. Unlike a proc, a lambda requires a specific number of arguments passed to it, and it return s to its calling method rather than returning immediately. proc_demo = Proc. new { return "Only I print!" }
A Proc object is an encapsulation of a block of code, which can be stored in a local variable, passed to a method or another Proc, and can be called. Proc is an essential concept in Ruby and a core of its functional programming features.
When using parameters prefixed with ampersands, passing a block to a method results in a proc in the method's context. Procs behave like blocks, but they can be stored in a variable. Lambdas are procs that behave like methods, meaning they enforce arity and return as methods instead of in their parent scope.
This one was a bit tricky to track down. Looking at the docs for Proc#lambda?
for 1.9, there's a fairly lengthy discussion about the difference between proc
s and lamdba
s.
What it comes down to is that a lambda
enforces the correct number of arguments, and a proc
doesn't. And from that documentation, about the only way to convert a proc into a lambda is shown in this example:
define_method
always defines a method without the tricks, even if a non-lambda Proc object is given. This is the only exception which the tricks are not preserved.class C define_method(:e, &proc {}) end C.new.e(1,2) => ArgumentError C.new.method(:e).to_proc.lambda? => true
If you want to avoid polluting any class, you can just define a singleton method on an anonymous object in order to coerce a proc
to a lambda
:
def convert_to_lambda &block
obj = Object.new
obj.define_singleton_method(:_, &block)
return obj.method(:_).to_proc
end
p = Proc.new {}
puts p.lambda? # false
puts(convert_to_lambda(&p).lambda?) # true
puts(convert_to_lambda(&(lambda {})).lambda?) # true
It is not possible to convert a proc to a lambda without trouble. The answer by Mark Rushakoff doesn't preserve the value of self
in the block, because self
becomes Object.new
. The answer by Pawel Tomulik can't work with Ruby 2.1, because define_singleton_method
now returns a Symbol, so to_lambda2
returns :_.to_proc
.
My answer is also wrong:
def convert_to_lambda &block
obj = block.binding.eval('self')
Module.new.module_exec do
define_method(:_, &block)
instance_method(:_).bind(obj).to_proc
end
end
It preserves the value of self
in the block:
p = 42.instance_exec { proc { self }}
puts p.lambda? # false
puts p.call # 42
q = convert_to_lambda &p
puts q.lambda? # true
puts q.call # 42
But it fails with instance_exec
:
puts 66.instance_exec &p # 66
puts 66.instance_exec &q # 42, should be 66
I must use block.binding.eval('self')
to find the correct object. I put my method in an anonymous module, so it never pollutes any class. Then I bind my method to the correct object. This works though the object never included the module! The bound method makes a lambda.
66.instance_exec &q
fails because q
is secretly a method bound to 42
, and instance_exec
can't rebind the method. One might fix this by extending q
to expose the unbound method, and redefining instance_exec
to bind the unbound method to a different object. Even so, module_exec
and class_exec
would still fail.
class Array
$p = proc { def greet; puts "Hi!"; end }
end
$q = convert_to_lambda &$p
Hash.class_exec &$q
{}.greet # undefined method `greet' for {}:Hash (NoMethodError)
The problem is that Hash.class_exec &$q
defines Array#greet
and not Hash#greet
. (Though $q
is secretly a method of an anonymous module, it still defines methods in Array
, not in the anonymous module.) With the original proc, Hash.class_exec &$p
would define Hash#greet
. I conclude that convert_to_lambda
is wrong because it doesn't work with class_exec
.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With