From: Paul Mckibbin <pmckibbin@...>
Date: 2009-04-22T04:01:31+09:00
Subject: Is there a better way to do this?

I recently had code which needed to work with the same structure twice,
once using the . nomenclature and once with an index into a hash.
i.e. in one case I had

entries=@log.entry

which I would interrogate with:

entries.timings.connect.first_byte

or alternatively

entries.XmlSimple(in_file)

which I would interrogate with:

entries['timings']['connect']['first_byte'].

Rather than write two blocks for code, one for the in-memory, I decided
to override the base structure that XmlSimple used, but I found out that
it was Hash. So the following was what I came up with:

  class Hash
    def method_missing(sym,*args,&blk)
     return self[sym] if self.keys.include?(sym)
     return self[sym.to_s] if self.keys.include?(sym.to_s)
     super
    end
  end

which works for me, but I was wondering if there is a better way to do
this than calling self.keys.include? to determine if the key exists
without triggering any unexpected side effects.

Mac
http://pqmf.com
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.