«

Hi,
I have one array for example[1,2,3,4]

i need to find the matching elements of another array is there any way
to find....
for example [1,2,3,4].include?(2)
it will return true
but i need to find one or more elements
example : [1,2,3,4].include?(2,3)
it is throwing an error



If you have solution reply me

Thanx
Pragash
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

> class Array
> def contains?(array)
> (self & array) == array
> end
> end

Note however, this will only work if the match is in order.

For example

[1,2,3,4].contains?([2,1]) #=> false

But

[1,2,3,4].contains?([1,4]) #=> true

That might be what you want. If not, you could call sort on it as well.

ANyway... the point is, you can have a look at the ruby rdoc and find
a lot about this. Arrays have been around for a while and Ruby
handles them more elegantly than any other language I have used.

Go have a read: http://www.ruby-doc.org/core/classes/Array.html

Mikel


--
http://lindsaar.net/
Rails, RSpec and Life blog....

On 07.07.2008, at 08:04, Pragash Mr. wrote:

> I have one array for example[1,2,3,4]
>
> i need to find the matching elements of another array is there any way
> to find....
> for example [1,2,3,4].include?(2)
> it will return true
> but i need to find one or more elements
> example : [1,2,3,4].include?(2,3)
> it is throwing an error
>
>
>
> If you have solution reply me


class Array
alias old_include? include?
def include?(*args)

if args.length <=3D 1
old_include?(args)
else
args.all? do |a|
old_include?(a)
end
end
end
end

puts("#{(0..9).to_a.include?(3,5)}") # true
puts("#{('a'..'z').to_a.include?(3,5)}") # false
puts("#{('A'..'ZZ').to_a.include?('G','AB')}")# true

regards, Sandor Sz=FCcs
--

On Jul 7, 1:04=A0am, "Pragash Mr." <gananapraga...@srishtisoft.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
> I have one array for example[1,2,3,4]
>
> i need to find the matching elements of another array is there any way
> to find....
> for example [1,2,3,4].include?(2)
> it will return true
> but i need to find one or more elements
> example : [1,2,3,4].include?(2,3)
> it is throwing an error
>
> If you have solution reply me
>
> Thanx
> Pragash
> --
> Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.

How about something like this?

a =3D [1,2,3,4]
x =3D [2,3]

x.all? { |n| a.include?(n) }

(warning, this is slow for large arrays)

Jeff

On Jul 7, 1:32 am, Sandor Sz=FCcs <sandor.szu...@fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> class Array
> alias old_include? include?
> def include?(*args)
>
> if args.length <=3D 1
> old_include?(args)
> else
> args.all? do |a|
> old_include?(a)
> end
> end
> end
> end
>
> puts("#{(0..9).to_a.include?(3,5)}") # true
> puts("#{('a'..'z').to_a.include?(3,5)}") # false
> puts("#{('A'..'ZZ').to_a.include?('G','AB')}")# true
>
> regards, Sandor Sz=FCcs
> --

Two things:

1) This doesn't work. Try ('a'..'z').to_a.include?('a')
2) The length check isn't necessary. It's sufficient to just use
args.all? { |a| old_include?(a) }, assuming it's okay that calling
include? with no arguments now returns true.

I like Mikel's set-intersection solution (which, incidentally, is what
I was thinking), assuming once again that the order is important.

--
-yossef

Hi,

On 08.07.2008, at 02:24, Yossef Mendelssohn wrote:
> On Jul 7, 1:32 am, Sandor Sz=FCcs <sandor.szu...@fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> class Array
>> alias old_include? include?
>> def include?(*args)
>>
>> if args.length <=3D 1
>> old_include?(args)
>> else
>> args.all? do |a|
>> old_include?(a)
>> end
>> end
>> end
>> end
>>
>> puts("#{(0..9).to_a.include?(3,5)}") # true
>> puts("#{('a'..'z').to_a.include?(3,5)}") # false
>> puts("#{('A'..'ZZ').to_a.include?('G','AB')}")# true
>>
>> regards, Sandor Sz=FCcs
>> --
>
> Two things:
>
> 1) This doesn't work. Try ('a'..'z').to_a.include?('a')

ack.

> 2) The length check isn't necessary. It's sufficient to just use
> args.all? { |a| old_include?(a) }, assuming it's okay that calling
> include? with no arguments now returns true.

ack.

> I like Mikel's set-intersection solution (which, incidentally, is what
> I was thinking), assuming once again that the order is important.

That's also what I thought if I read that e-mail.

regards, Sandor Sz=FCcs
--=

On Jul 7, 9:12 pm, "David A. Black" <dbl...@rubypal.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2008, Yossef Mendelssohn wrote:
> > 2) The length check isn't necessary. It's sufficient to just use
> > args.all? { |a| old_include?(a) }, assuming it's okay that calling
> > include? with no arguments now returns true.
>
> I'd be in favor of keeping that safeguard, partly because it feels
> weird for [1,2,3].include?() to be true and partly because there might
> be some edge case or test where having it succeed silently might be
> problematic.

Oh, I'd probably put a safeguard in there, possibly a check on the
number of arguments so that [1,2,3].include?() still raises an
ArgumentError.

My comment about the length check not being necessary wasn't a
judgement of how I would write it
as much as it was just saying that code doesn't perform any useful
function in that context. Personally, I think [].all? shouldn't be
true, but that debate has happened before.

--
-yossef