Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 866927
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 15, 20262026-05-15T09:53:26+00:00 2026-05-15T09:53:26+00:00

Let’s say I have a function def odd_or_even n if n%2 == 0 return

  • 0

Let’s say I have a function

def odd_or_even n
  if n%2 == 0
    return :even
  else
    return :odd
  end
end

And I had a simple enumerable array

simple = [1,2,3,4,5]

And I ran it through map, with my function, using a do-end block:

simple.map do
  |n| odd_or_even(n)
end
# => [:odd,:even,:odd,:even,:odd]

How could I do this without, say, defining the function in the first place? For example,

# does not work
simple.map do |n|
  if n%2 == 0
    return :even
  else
    return :odd
  end
end

# Desired result:
# => [:odd,:even,:odd,:even,:odd]

is not valid ruby, and the compiler gets mad at me for even thinking about it. But how would I implement an equivalent sort of thing, that works?

edit

In reality, the solution to my problem matters to me a lot less than the motivation/reasoning behind it, to help me understand more how ruby blocks work 🙂

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-15T09:53:27+00:00Added an answer on May 15, 2026 at 9:53 am

    You’re so close. Just remove the returns and you’re golden.

    This is because the block passed to map is a proc (i.e. created with Proc.new), and not a lambda. A return within a proc doesn’t just jump out of the proc- it jumps out of the method that executed (i.e. called call on) the proc. A return within a lambda, on the other hand, jumps out of only the lambda.

    The proc method returns a lambda in Ruby 1.8, and a Proc in Ruby 1.9. It’s probably best to just not use this method and be explicit with which construct you want to use.

    I’m guessing you were either in IRB or a plain ruby script when you were trying this out.

    a = Proc.new { return }
    a.call # fails. Nothing to return from.
    
    def foobar
      a = Proc.new { return }
      a.call
      puts 'hello' # not reached. The return within the proc causes execution to jump out of the foobar method.
    end
    foobar # succeeds, but does not print 'hello'. The return within the proc jumps out of the foobar method.
    
    b = lambda { return }
    b.call # succeeds. The return only returns from the lambda itself.
    
    def bazquux
      b = lambda { return }
      b.call
      puts 'hello' # this is reached. The lambda only returned from itself.
    end
    bazquux # succeeds, and prints 'hello'
    

    The lesson to learn from this is to use implicit returns unless you can’t, I guess.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Let's say we have a simple function defined in a pseudo language. List<Numbers> SortNumbers(List<Numbers>
Let's say I have a constructor Alpha: //[#1] Alpha = function(a,b){ attrib1 = a;
let's say we have some simple code like this : private static void Main()
Let's say I have the following function in C#: void ProcessResults() { using (FormProgress
Let say I have a project the consists of following parts: Front-end App (JavaScript)
Let's say I don't have photoshop, but I want to make pattern files (.pat)
Let's say I have a method in java, which looks up a user in
Let me explain best with an example. Say you have node class that can
Let's say I have a table with a Color column. Color can have various
Let's say that I have a SQLite database that I create in a separate

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.