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 262577
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 11, 20262026-05-11T22:31:38+00:00 2026-05-11T22:31:38+00:00

What’s the best way to abstract this pattern: class MyClass attr_accessor :foo, :bar def

  • 0

What’s the best way to abstract this pattern:

class MyClass
  attr_accessor :foo, :bar

  def initialize(foo, bar)
    @foo, @bar = foo, bar
  end
end

A good solution should take superclasses into consideration and be able to handle still being able to have an initializer to do more things. Extra points for not sacrificing performance in your solution.

  • 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
    2026-05-11T22:31:38+00:00Added an answer on May 11, 2026 at 10:31 pm

    A solution to that problem already (partially) exists, but if you want a more declarative approach in your classes then the following should work.

    class Class
      def initialize_with(*attrs, &block)
        attrs.each do |attr|
          attr_accessor attr
        end
        (class << self; self; end).send :define_method, :new do |*args|
          obj = allocate
          init_args, surplus_args = args[0...attrs.size], args[attrs.size..-1]
          attrs.zip(init_args) do |attr, arg|
            obj.instance_variable_set "@#{attr}", arg
          end
          obj.send :initialize, *surplus_args
          obj
        end
      end
    end
    

    You can now do:

    class MyClass < ParentClass
      initialize_with :foo, :bar
      def initialize(baz)
        @initialized = true
        super(baz) # pass any arguments to initializer of superclass
      end
    end
    my_obj = MyClass.new "foo", "bar", "baz"
    my_obj.foo #=> "foo"
    my_obj.bar #=> "bar"
    my_obj.instance_variable_get(:@initialized) #=> true
    

    Some characteristics of this solution:

    • Specify constructor attributes with initialize_with
    • Optionally use initialize to do custom initialization
    • Possible to call super in initialize
    • Arguments to initialize are the arguments that were not consumed by attributes specified with initialize_with
    • Easily extracted into a Module
    • Constructor attributes specified with initialize_with are inherited, but defining a new set on a child class will remove the parent attributes
    • Dynamic solution probably has performance hit

    If you want to create a solution with absolute minimal performance overhead, it would be not that difficult to refactor most of the functionality into a string which can be evaled when the initializer is defined. I have not benchmarked what the difference would be.

    Note: I found that hacking new works better than hacking initialize. If you define initialize with metaprogramming, you’d probably get a scenario where you pass a block to initialize_with as a substitute initializer, and it’s not possible to use super in a block.

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have a string like this: La Torre Eiffel paragonata all&#8217;Everest What PHP function
I'm parsing an RSS feed that has an &#8217; in it. SimpleXML turns this
link Im having trouble converting the html entites into html characters, (&# 8217;) i
For some reason, after submitting a string like this Jack’s Spindle from a text
this is what i have right now Drawing an RSS feed into the php,
I have this code to decode numeric html entities to the UTF8 equivalent character.
I am doing a simple coin flipping experiment for class that involves flipping a
I have this code: - (void)parser:(NSXMLParser *)parser foundCDATA:(NSData *)CDATABlock { NSString *someString = [[NSString
Does anyone know how can I replace this 2 symbol below from the string
I have some data like this: 1 2 3 4 5 9 2 6

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.