From: Jean-Julien Fleck on 17 Jul 2010 08:05 Hello, I'm stuck with a problem concerning IO.popen It's not necessarily related to irb but that's a good point where to start. I'd like to drive irb from ruby using IO.popen. The problem is: each time I type something inside irb, I can get one, two or more lines of output I'd like to store with no way to know beforehand how many there will be. The thing is: I don't know how to detect when irb has ended its output and is waiting for me to give some input. I tried the following: def irb(string) output = '' puts "Trying to talk to irb" IO.popen('irb --simple-prompt','r+') do |io| string.chomp.split.each do |s| io.puts s while line = io.gets line = io.gets puts line output += line end end end return output end s = "2+2\n'2'+'2'\n'2'+2" irb(s) I was hoping that io.gets would be nil when irb is waiting for input, but it's not. So this little program gets stuck after the first statement: brisingr ~/tmp>ruby essai_irb.rb Trying to talk to irb => 4 Rather, I would like him to return >> 2+2 => 4 >> '2'+'2' => "22" >> '2'+2 TypeError: can't convert Fixnum into String from (irb):4:in `+' from (irb):4 Does someone have a workaround ? Thanks, -- JJ Fleck PCSI1 Lycée Kléber
From: Caleb Clausen on 17 Jul 2010 08:38 On 7/17/10, Jean-Julien Fleck <jeanjulien.fleck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I'm stuck with a problem concerning IO.popen > It's not necessarily related to irb but that's a good point where to start. > > I'd like to drive irb from ruby using IO.popen. The problem is: each > time I type something inside irb, I can get one, two or more lines of > output I'd like to store with no way to know beforehand how many there > will be. > > The thing is: I don't know how to detect when irb has ended its output > and is waiting for me to give some input. > > I tried the following: > > def irb(string) > output = '' > puts "Trying to talk to irb" > IO.popen('irb --simple-prompt','r+') do |io| > string.chomp.split.each do |s| > io.puts s > while line = io.gets > line = io.gets > puts line > output += line > end > end > end > return output > end > > s = "2+2\n'2'+'2'\n'2'+2" > > irb(s) > > I was hoping that io.gets would be nil when irb is waiting for input, > but it's not. So this little program gets stuck after the first > statement: > > brisingr ~/tmp>ruby essai_irb.rb > Trying to talk to irb > => 4 > > Rather, I would like him to return > >>> 2+2 > => 4 >>> '2'+'2' > => "22" >>> '2'+2 > TypeError: can't convert Fixnum into String > from (irb):4:in `+' > from (irb):4 > > Does someone have a workaround ? You could try to detect whether irb is waiting based an what prompt it prints. Alternately, you could use non-blocking io with a timeout to determine when it is no longer printing anything to output. Neither method is going to be a sure-fire way to determine when irb is waiting, but you should be able to come up with something that works well enough most of the time. You could even combine the 2 for greater reliability.
From: Robert Klemme on 17 Jul 2010 11:05 On 07/17/2010 02:05 PM, Jean-Julien Fleck wrote: > I'm stuck with a problem concerning IO.popen > It's not necessarily related to irb but that's a good point where to start. > > I'd like to drive irb from ruby using IO.popen. The problem is: each > time I type something inside irb, I can get one, two or more lines of > output I'd like to store with no way to know beforehand how many there > will be. > > The thing is: I don't know how to detect when irb has ended its output > and is waiting for me to give some input. > > I tried the following: > > def irb(string) > output = '' > puts "Trying to talk to irb" > IO.popen('irb --simple-prompt','r+') do |io| > string.chomp.split.each do |s| > io.puts s > while line = io.gets > line = io.gets > puts line > output += line Note: << is more efficient than += here. > end > end > end > return output > end > > s = "2+2\n'2'+'2'\n'2'+2" > > irb(s) > > I was hoping that io.gets would be nil when irb is waiting for input, > but it's not. So this little program gets stuck after the first > statement: > > brisingr ~/tmp>ruby essai_irb.rb > Trying to talk to irb > => 4 > > Rather, I would like him to return > >>> 2+2 > => 4 >>> '2'+'2' > => "22" >>> '2'+2 > TypeError: can't convert Fixnum into String > from (irb):4:in `+' > from (irb):4 > > Does someone have a workaround ? Not a workaround but a solution: since you only want to collect the output of irb and do not need to react on it you can simply use a second thread that collects all the output. def irb_test(strings) puts "Trying to talk to irb" IO.popen('irb --simple-prompt','r+') do |io| rdr = Thread.new { io.read } io.puts strings io.close_write rdr.value end end Kind regards robert -- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/
From: Jean-Julien Fleck on 17 Jul 2010 12:43 Hello Robert, > Note: << is more efficient than += here. Yes. Bad habit on my side: I tend to find it more readable that way so I don't use << so often. I should rather use it more to find it easier to read :o) Correct me if I'm wrong: << will append to the existing String object whereas += will create a brand new String object by concatenating the two (the old version and what I want to add), so it could be less efficient if the string gets too long and/or if there are a lot of line to append ? > Not a workaround but a solution: since you only want to collect the output > of irb and do not need to react on it you can simply use a second thread > that collects all the output. Thanks a lot, it works perfectly ! I don't need it now but as I have already been confronted to this issue (finding workarounds as I had access to the other program and could modify it), I'll ask anyway: how would you tackle the problem if you did have to react to the output ? (just some hints would perfectly please me) Thanks again, -- JJ Fleck PCSI1 Lycée Kléber
From: Robert Klemme on 18 Jul 2010 03:26 On 07/17/2010 06:43 PM, Jean-Julien Fleck wrote: > Hello Robert, > >> Note:<< is more efficient than += here. > > Yes. Bad habit on my side: I tend to find it more readable that way so > I don't use<< so often. I should rather use it more to find it easier > to read :o) > > Correct me if I'm wrong:<< will append to the existing String object > whereas += will create a brand new String object by concatenating the > two (the old version and what I want to add), Correct. > so it could be less > efficient if the string gets too long and/or if there are a lot of > line to append ? I don't think so. You have two cost factors: allocating the underlying memory to hold the sequence of characters (or bytes if you will) and the allocation of an object, registration with GC etc. The first cost factor needs to be paid regardless of variant used while the second costs factor is not incurred with the << version. Memory allocation overhead is usually kept low by using a smart algorithm for calculating the size of the next memory chunk to allocate so allocations become rarer with more append operations of identical sized strings. IMHO the version with the single read that slurps in everything is even more efficient because you loop in C and not in Ruby. (Note that Ruby's multithreading is not negatively affected; the single read does not block other threads.) >> Not a workaround but a solution: since you only want to collect the output >> of irb and do not need to react on it you can simply use a second thread >> that collects all the output. > > Thanks a lot, it works perfectly ! > > I don't need it now but as I have already been confronted to this > issue (finding workarounds as I had access to the other program and > could modify it), I'll ask anyway: how would you tackle the problem if > you did have to react to the output ? (just some hints would perfectly > please me) There is expect ("ri IO#expect"). Documentation is a tad sparse but there's likely more to find on the web. Kind regards robert -- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 Prev: Infinite Loop in Code -- Logic Error Next: Different results in command-line vs. TextMate |