Forum: Ruby Working with kernel.eval

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
8f6770aa18a37c249412a24fb2570bf8?d=identicon&s=25 Ian Whitney (Guest)
on 2006-02-13 21:07
(Received via mailing list)
I'm trying to calculate the results of formulas that are stored in
text files.

For example, a file may contain the line: 1+2/3

I want to take that line & get the result of the formula, 1.66 (roughly)

The way to do this seems to be Kernel.eval. But I can't get it to
work correctly. Here's my irb session:

irb(main):001:0> a = "1+2/3"
=> "1+2/3"
irb(main):002:0> b = eval(a)
=> 1
irb(main):004:0> b.class
=> Fixnum

I would think that eval(a) should return a Float, not a Fixnum.

I thought maybe that eval wasn't following the standard order of
operations, which could explain the return value of 1. So then I
tried this:

irb(main):005:0> a = "2/3"
=> "2/3"
irb(main):006:0> b = eval(a)
=> 0
irb(main):007:0> b.class
=> Fixnum


So, it's not an order of operations thing.

Maybe I shouldn't be using eval. But I can't find another option. Any
thoughts?

Thanks,

Ian
3ccecc71b9fb0a3d7f00a0bef6f0a63a?d=identicon&s=25 Kent Sibilev (Guest)
on 2006-02-13 21:11
(Received via mailing list)
$ irb
irb(main):001:0> 2/3
=> 0
irb(main):002:0> 2.0/3
=> 0.666666666666667
irb(main):003:0>

Kent.
47b1910084592eb77a032bc7d8d1a84e?d=identicon&s=25 Joel VanderWerf (Guest)
on 2006-02-13 21:15
(Received via mailing list)
Ian Whitney wrote:
> irb(main):001:0> a = "1+2/3"
> => "1+2/3"
> irb(main):002:0> b = eval(a)
> => 1
> irb(main):004:0> b.class
> => Fixnum
>
> I would think that eval(a) should return a Float, not a Fixnum.

It's nothing to do with eval, but rather that if you start with fixnums,
you do fixnum arithmetic. Try replacing 2 with 2.0. That invokes float
division, and every result depending on that input will be float. In
general, you can use x.to_f if you want to force a value to be treated
as float.
430ea1cba106cc65b7687d66e9df4f06?d=identicon&s=25 David Vallner (Guest)
on 2006-02-13 21:19
(Received via mailing list)
require "mathn" for a batch of tweaks that will make Ruby maths
expression
more maths-like than C-like.

David Vallner

DÅ?a Pondelok 13 Február 2006 21:07 Ian Whitney napísal:
8f6770aa18a37c249412a24fb2570bf8?d=identicon&s=25 Ian Whitney (Guest)
on 2006-02-13 21:24
(Received via mailing list)
This works and I appreciate the response. But it doesn't solve the
problem that the formulas in the text files already exist & they
weren't written with Ruby's arithmetic in mind. My life would be
easier if I didn't have to go update all of those text files.

Any thoughts on how I can take the string as it stands, "1+2/3" and
get the right answer? I could use regex to replace every integer with
a floating point number, I guess. But that seems kludgey.
4299e35bacef054df40583da2d51edea?d=identicon&s=25 James Gray (bbazzarrakk)
on 2006-02-13 21:29
(Received via mailing list)
On Feb 13, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Ian Whitney wrote:

> Any thoughts on how I can take the string as it stands, "1+2/3" and
> get the right answer?

Well, depending on how many operators you need to support, it's
fairly easy to parse them into an Abstract Syntax Tree and run the
calculation.

James Edward Gray II
47b1910084592eb77a032bc7d8d1a84e?d=identicon&s=25 Joel VanderWerf (Guest)
on 2006-02-13 22:09
(Received via mailing list)
Ian Whitney wrote:

> Any thoughts on how I can take the string as it stands, "1+2/3" and get
> the right answer? I could use regex to replace every integer with a
> floating point number, I guess. But that seems kludgey.

David's suggestion to require 'mathn' is a good way to go, but be aware
that 2/3 will evaluate to a rational--precise, but in general slower to
compute with.
8f6770aa18a37c249412a24fb2570bf8?d=identicon&s=25 Ian Whitney (Guest)
on 2006-02-14 03:59
(Received via mailing list)
That does appear to be the best solution. I plugged that in & my unit
tests look good.

Thanks,

Ian
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.