Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Ruby equivalent of C#'s 'yield' keyword, or, creating sequences without preallocating memory

In C#, you could do something like this:

public IEnumerable<T> GetItems<T>()
{
    for (int i=0; i<10000000; i++) {
        yield return i;
    }
}

This returns an enumerable sequence of 10 million integers without ever allocating a collection in memory of that length.

Is there a way of doing an equivalent thing in Ruby? The specific example I am trying to deal with is the flattening of a rectangular array into a sequence of values to be enumerated. The return value does not have to be an Array or Set, but rather some kind of sequence that can only be iterated/enumerated in order, not by index. Consequently, the entire sequence need not be allocated in memory concurrently. In .NET, this is IEnumerable and IEnumerable<T>.

Any clarification on the terminology used here in the Ruby world would be helpful, as I am more familiar with .NET terminology.

EDIT

Perhaps my original question wasn't really clear enough -- I think the fact that yield has very different meanings in C# and Ruby is the cause of confusion here.

I don't want a solution that requires my method to use a block. I want a solution that has an actual return value. A return value allows convenient processing of the sequence (filtering, projection, concatenation, zipping, etc).

Here's a simple example of how I might use get_items:

things = obj.get_items.select { |i| !i.thing.nil? }.map { |i| i.thing }

In C#, any method returning IEnumerable that uses a yield return causes the compiler to generate a finite state machine behind the scenes that caters for this behaviour. I suspect something similar could be achieved using Ruby's continuations, but I haven't seen an example and am not quite clear myself on how this would be done.

It does indeed seem possible that I might use Enumerable to achieve this. A simple solution would be to us an Array (which includes module Enumerable), but I do not want to create an intermediate collection with N items in memory when it's possible to just provide them lazily and avoid any memory spike at all.

If this still doesn't make sense, then consider the above code example. get_items returns an enumeration, upon which select is called. What is passed to select is an instance that knows how to provide the next item in the sequence whenever it is needed. Importantly, the whole collection of items hasn't been calculated yet. Only when select needs an item will it ask for it, and the latent code in get_items will kick into action and provide it. This laziness carries along the chain, such that select only draws the next item from the sequence when map asks for it. As such, a long chain of operations can be performed on one data item at a time. In fact, code structured in this way can even process an infinite sequence of values without any kinds of memory errors.

So, this kind of laziness is easily coded in C#, and I don't know how to do it in Ruby.

I hope that's clearer (I'll try to avoid writing questions at 3AM in future.)

like image 255
Drew Noakes Avatar asked Feb 17 '10 16:02

Drew Noakes


2 Answers

It's supported by Enumerator since Ruby 1.9 (and back-ported to 1.8.7). See Generator: Ruby.

Cliche example:

fib = Enumerator.new do |y|
  y.yield i = 0
  y.yield j = 1
  while true
    k = i + j
    y.yield k
    i = j
    j = k
  end
end

100.times { puts fib.next() }
like image 88
Matthew Flaschen Avatar answered Oct 21 '22 15:10

Matthew Flaschen


Your specific example is equivalent to 10000000.times, but let's assume for a moment that the times method didn't exist and you wanted to implement it yourself, it'd look like this:

class Integer
  def my_times
    return enum_for(:my_times) unless block_given?
    i=0
    while i<self
      yield i
      i += 1
    end
  end
end

10000.my_times # Returns an Enumerable which will let
               # you iterate of the numbers from 0 to 10000 (exclusive)

Edit: To clarify my answer a bit:

In the above example my_times can be (and is) used without a block and it will return an Enumerable object, which will let you iterate over the numbers from 0 to n. So it is exactly equivalent to your example in C#.

This works using the enum_for method. The enum_for method takes as its argument the name of a method, which will yield some items. It then returns an instance of class Enumerator (which includes the module Enumerable), which when iterated over will execute the given method and give you the items which were yielded by the method. Note that if you only iterate over the first x items of the enumerable, the method will only execute until x items have been yielded (i.e. only as much as necessary of the method will be executed) and if you iterate over the enumerable twice, the method will be executed twice.

In 1.8.7+ it has become to define methods, which yield items, so that when called without a block, they will return an Enumerator which will let the user iterate over those items lazily. This is done by adding the line return enum_for(:name_of_this_method) unless block_given? to the beginning of the method like I did in my example.

like image 21
sepp2k Avatar answered Oct 21 '22 13:10

sepp2k