Project

General

Profile

Misc #16678

Array#values_at has unintuitive behavior when supplied a range starting with negative index

Added by prajjwal (Prajjwal Singh) 11 months ago. Updated 11 months ago.

Status:
Open
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
-
[ruby-core:97391]

Description

Consider the following:

# frozen_string_literal: true

a = (1..5).to_a

p a.values_at(3..5) # => [4, 5, nil]
p a.values_at(-1..3)  # => []

When the range begins with a negative (-1, 0, 1, 2, 3), it returns an empty array, which surprised me because I was expecting [1, 2, 3, 4].

The argument for this is that it cold be confusing to allow this because the index -1 could refer to the last argument and it would be unintuitive to return an array [5, 1, 2, 3, 4] with jumbled values.

The argument against it is that it makes perfect sense to account for this case and return [nil, 1, 2, 3, 4].

Opening a dialog to see what others think of this.

Updated by shevegen (Robert A. Heiler) 11 months ago

Actually .values_at() confused me when I tried to use my go-to method for
obtaining a slice from an Array:

a[3..5] # => [4, 5]

There I wondered why it did not return the same. :-)

But anyway; I believe the question is what -1 refers to. It should be the
last entry, right? Ok, so what should the 3 indicate? I think you reason
that it should refer to the fourth entry (I think ... if an Array count
begins at 0, then 3 would refer to the fourth entry). So from that point
of view I actually do not even disagree with you; perhaps I may have
missed some other explanation. (There is probably another explanation;
I think this has come up in the past too. I forgot the explanation,
though, if there was one.)

Personally I will stick with [] an leave .values_at() to others. I am
just so used to [] there. ;-)

Updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze) 11 months ago

You can easily achieve wrap-around behavior with:

> (1..5).to_a.values_at(*(-1..3))
=> [5, 1, 2, 3, 4]

Using a Range for values_at is like taking a slice with Array#[]/slice, and Array slices never wrap around (a good thing IMHO, that would be expensive to compute and confusing).

Updated by Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) 11 months ago

Negative indices have always meant "offset from the end" in ruby. So if you take a negative index and add the size of the array you get the "normal index" and then I think you'll see everything is pretty intuitive.

a = (1..5).to_a

# get all values from a[-4] (a[1]) to a[3]
a.values_at(-4..3) #=> [2, 3, 4]
a.values_at(1..3)  #=> [2, 3, 4]

# get all values from a[-1] (a[4]) to a[3]
a.values_at(-1..3) #=> []
a.values_at(4..3)  #=> []  #range start > range end = empty range, therefore empty array

But I think this is slightly inconsistent:

(4..6).map{ a[_1] } #=> [5, nil, nil]
a.values_at(4..6)   #=> [5, nil, nil]

(-7..-5).map{ a[_1] } #=> [nil, nil, 1]
a.values_at(-7..-5)   #=> RangeError (-7..-5 out of range), should be [nil, nil, 1] imho

Also available in: Atom PDF