views:

120

answers:

1

What are things like survey.map(&:questions).flatten.compact called, so I can find more information about them :). What problems does that &: solve, or what is it doing exactly? Is it used in other languages?

+7  A: 

This is shorthand for:

survey.map { |s| s.questions }.flatten.compact

It's the Symbol#to_proc method. It used to be a part of Rails' ActiveSupport, but has since been added to Ruby syntax.

As far as performance goes, I wrote a quick benchmark script to get an idea of performance effect in both 1.8 and 1.9.

require 'benchmark'

many = 500
a = (1..10000).to_a

Benchmark.bm do |x|
  x.report('block once') { a.map { |n| n.to_s } }
  x.report('to_proc once') { a.map(&:to_s) }
  x.report('block many') { many.times { a.map { |n| n.to_s } } }
  x.report('to_proc many') { many.times { a.map(&:to_s) } }
end

First off, before giving you the results - if you weren't already sure that Ruby 1.9 was a huge speed improvement in general, prepare to be blown away.

Ruby 1.8 results:

     user     system      total        real
block once  0.020000   0.000000   0.020000 (  0.016781)
to_proc once  0.010000   0.000000   0.010000 (  0.013881)
block many  6.680000   1.100000   7.780000 (  7.780532)
to_proc many  7.370000   0.540000   7.910000 (  7.902935)

Ruby 1.9 results:

      user     system      total        real
block once  0.010000   0.000000   0.010000 (  0.011433)
to_proc once  0.000000   0.000000   0.000000 (  0.004929)
block many  4.060000   0.000000   4.060000 (  4.057013)
to_proc many  2.810000   0.000000   2.810000 (  2.810312)

First off: Wow. Ruby 1.9 is fast. But the more relevant conclusions we draw here are interesting:

  • In both cases, for only one run, to_proc is clearly faster. In 1.8 on the many-times run, it's tad slower. This seems to indicate that the only real performance bottleneck is creating all those Proc objects.
  • In Ruby 1.9, however, the to_proc method is clearly much faster than blocks, no matter how many times you do it. In this case, you not only get cleaner code, but improved performance, as well.

In the end, no matter which version you're using, to_proc is clearly not enough of a performance issue to be worth not using - in fact, it sometimes speeds things up!

Matchu
+1 Yuppers! It calls a method on the object in question. Nice example.
Doug Neiner
is there a specific term for it perhaps, is it used in other languages?
viatropos
`Symbol#to_proc` is the best I can find for it. Perhaps more Googling will turn up better...
Matchu
...nope, even the best blogs leave it at just that name, from what I can find. Seems to be a fairly Ruby-unique construct, especially since it's pretty much a type-coercion hack.
Matchu
klochner
thank you! love that kind of info, any sources??
viatropos
@klochner: Longer than... what? Longer than `.map(:questions.to_proc)`? Longer than `.map {|s| s.questions}`? Both? Something else?
Myrddin Emrys
http://blog.thoughtfolder.com/2008-02-25-a-detailed-explanation-of-ruby-s-symbol-to-proc.html - says it's a 20% performance hit as opposed to a block
Matchu
I believe the version implemented in Ruby 1.9 doesn't have this performance penalty.
Greg Campbell
anyone have 1.8 and 1.9 on the same machine? Let's test it.
klochner
1.8 vs 1.9 benchmark added. Surprising results, and I had never noticed just how much faster 1.9 is!
Matchu