Access variables programmatically by name in Ruby

You need to re-architect your solution. Even if you could do it (you can't), the question simply doesn't have a reasonable answer.

Imagine a get_name method.

a = 1
get_name(a)

Everyone could probably agree this should return 'a'

b = a
get_name(b)

Should it return 'b', or 'a', or an array containing both?

[b,a].each do |arg|
  get_name(arg)
end

Should it return 'arg', 'b', or 'a' ?

def do_stuff( arg )
  get_name(arg)
do
do_stuff(b)

Should it return 'arg', 'b', or 'a', or maybe the array of all of them? Even if it did return an array, what would the order be and how would I know how to interpret the results?

The answer to all of the questions above is "It depends on the particular thing I want at the time." I'm not sure how you could solve that problem for Ruby.

It seems you are trying to solve a problem that has a far easier solution..

Why not just store the data in a hash? If you do..

data_container = {'foo' => ['goo', 'baz']}

..it is then utterly trivial to get the 'foo' name.

That said, you've not given any context to the problem, so there may be a reason you can't do this..

[edit] After clarification, I see the issue, but I don't think this is the problem.. With [foo, bar, bla], it's equivalent like saying ['content 1', 'content 2', 'etc']. The actual variables name is (or rather, should be) utterly irrelevant. If the name of the variable is important, that is exactly why hashes exist.

The problem isn't with iterating over [foo, bar] etc, it's the fundamental problem with how the SOAP server is returing the data, and/or how you're trying to use it.

The solution, I would say, is to either make the SOAP server return hashes, or, since you know there is always going to be three elements, can you not do something like..

{"foo" => foo, "goo" => goo, "bar"=>bar}.each do |param_name, param|
      if param.class != Array
        puts "#{param_name} wasn't an Array. It was a/an #{param.class}"
        puts "Error: #{param_name} wasn't an Array"
      end
end

OK, it DOES work in instance methods, too, and, based on your specific requirement (the one you put in the comment), you could do this:

local_variables.each do |var|
  puts var if (eval(var).class != Fixnum)
end

Just replace Fixnum with your specific type checking.

I do not know of any way to get a local variable name. But, you can use the instance_variables method, this will return an array of all the instance variable names in the object.

Simple call:

object.instance_variables

or

self.instance_variables

to get an array of all instance variable names.

Building on joshmsmoore, something like this would probably do it:

# Returns the first instance variable whose value == x
# Returns nil if no name maps to the given value
def instance_variable_name_for(x)
  self.instance_variables.find do |var|
    x == self.instance_variable_get(var)
  end
end

There's Kernel::local_variables, but I'm not sure that this will work for a method's local vars, and I don't know that you can manipulate it in such a way as to do what you wish to acheive.

Great question. I fully understand your motivation. Let me start by noting, that there are certain kinds of special objects, that, under certain circumstances, have knowledge of the variable, to which they have been assigned. These special objects are eg. Module instances, Class instances and Struct instances:

Dog = Class.new
Dog.name # Dog

The catch is, that this works only when the variable, to which the assignment is performed, is a constant. (We all know that Ruby constants are nothing more than emotionally sensitive variables.) Thus:

x = Module.new # creating an anonymous module
x.name #=> nil # the module does not know that it has been assigned to x
Animal = x # but will notice once we assign it to a constant
x.name #=> "Animal"

This behavior of objects being aware to which variables they have been assigned, is commonly called constant magic (because it is limited to constants). But this highly desirable constant magic only works for certain objects:

Rover = Dog.new
Rover.name #=> raises NoMethodError

Fortunately, I have written a gem y_support/name_magic, that takes care of this for you:

 # first, gem install y_support
require 'y_support/name_magic'

class Cat
  include NameMagic
end

The fact, that this only works with constants (ie. variables starting with a capital letter) is not such a big limitation. In fact, it gives you freedom to name or not to name your objects at will:

tmp = Cat.new # nameless kitty
tmp.name #=> nil
Josie = tmp # by assigning to a constant, we name the kitty Josie
tmp.name #=> :Josie

Unfortunately, this will not work with array literals, because they are internally constructed without using #new method, on which NameMagic relies. Therefore, to achieve what you want to, you will have to subclass Array:

require 'y_support/name_magic'
class MyArr < Array
  include NameMagic
end

foo = MyArr.new ["goo", "baz"] # not named yet
foo.name #=> nil
Foo = foo # but assignment to a constant is noticed
foo.name #=> :Foo

# You can even list the instances
MyArr.instances #=> [["goo", "baz"]]
MyArr.instance_names #=> [:Foo]

# Get an instance by name:
MyArr.instance "Foo" #=> ["goo", "baz"]
MyArr.instance :Foo #=> ["goo", "baz"]

# Rename it:
Foo.name = "Quux"
Foo.name #=> :Quux

# Or forget the name again:
MyArr.forget :Quux
Foo.name #=> nil

# In addition, you can name the object upon creation even without assignment
u = MyArr.new [1, 2], name: :Pair
u.name #=> :Pair
v = MyArr.new [1, 2, 3], ɴ: :Trinity
v.name #=> :Trinity

I achieved the constant magic-imitating behavior by searching all the constants in all the namespaces of the current Ruby object space. This wastes a fraction of second, but since the search is performed only once, there is no performance penalty once the object figures out its name. In the future, Ruby core team has promised const_assigned hook.

You can't, you need to go back to the drawing board and re-engineer your solution.

Foo is only a location to hold a pointer to the data. The data has no knowledge of what points at it. In Smalltalk systems you could ask the VM for all pointers to an object, but that would only get you the object that contained the foo variable, not foo itself. There is no real way to reference a vaiable in Ruby. As mentioned by one answer you can stil place a tag in the data that references where it came from or such, but generally that is not a good apporach to most problems. You can use a hash to receive the values in the first place, or use a hash to pass to your loop so you know the argument name for validation purposes as in DBR's answer.

The closest thing to a real answer to you question is to use the Enumerable method each_with_index instead of each, thusly:

my_array = [foo, baz, bar]
my_array.each_with_index do |item, index|
  if item.class != Array
    puts "#{my_array[index]} wasn't an Array. It was a/an #{item.class}"
  end
end

I removed the return statement from the block you were passing to each/each_with_index because it didn't do/mean anything. Each and each_with_index both return the array on which they were operating.

There's also something about scope in blocks worth noting here: if you've defined a variable outside of the block, it will be available within it. In other words, you could refer to foo, bar, and baz directly inside the block. The converse is not true: variables that you create for the first time inside the block will not be available outside of it.

Finally, the do/end syntax is preferred for multi-line blocks, but that's simply a matter of style, though it is universal in ruby code of any recent vintage.