277
votes

What is the right way to:

is_array("something") # => false         (or 1)

is_array(["something", "else"]) # => true  (or > 1)

or to get the count of items in it?

7
Do you want an actual array, or just something array-like? - Kathy Van Stone
There is no type-safety in Ruby. Don't worry about your variable being an array or not. The method should assume that it is, and go ahead and call count on it: my_array.count - user132447
Please read answers by zgchurch and DigitalRoss for more idiomatic Ruby. - DanT

7 Answers

551
votes

You probably want to use kind_of().

>> s = "something"
=> "something"
>> s.kind_of?(Array)
=> false
>> s = ["something", "else"]
=> ["something", "else"]
>> s.kind_of?(Array)
=> true
157
votes

Are you sure it needs to be an array? You may be able to use respond_to?(method) so your code would work for similar things that aren't necessarily arrays (maybe some other enumberable thing). If you do actually need an array, then the post describing the Array#kind\_of? method is best.

['hello'].respond_to?('each')
59
votes

Instead of testing for an Array, just convert whatever you get into a one-level Array, so your code only needs to handle the one case.

t = [*something]     # or...
t = Array(something) # or...
def f *x
    ...
end

Ruby has various ways to harmonize an API which can take an object or an Array of objects, so, taking a guess at why you want to know if something is an Array, I have a suggestion.

The splat operator contains lots of magic you can look up, or you can just call Array(something) which will add an Array wrapper if needed. It's similar to [*something] in this one case.

def f x
  p Array(x).inspect
  p [*x].inspect
end
f 1         # => "[1]"
f [1]       # => "[1]"
f [1,2]     # => "[1, 2]"

Or, you could use the splat in the parameter declaration and then .flatten, giving you a different sort of collector. (For that matter, you could call .flatten above, too.)

def f *x
  p x.flatten.inspect
end         # => nil
f 1         # => "[1]"
f 1,2       # => "[1, 2]"
f [1]       # => "[1]"
f [1,2]     # => "[1, 2]"
f [1,2],3,4 # => "[1, 2, 3, 4]"

And, thanks gregschlom, it's sometimes faster to just use Array(x) because when it's already an Array it doesn't need to create a new object.

28
votes

[1,2,3].is_a? Array evaluates to true.

18
votes

It sounds like you're after something that has some concept of items. I'd thus recommend seeing if it is Enumerable. That also guarantees the existence of #count.

For example,

[1,2,3].is_a? Enumerable
[1,2,3].count

note that, while size, length and count all work for arrays, count is the right meaning here - (for example, 'abc'.length and 'abc'.size both work, but 'abc'.count doesn't work like that).

Caution: a string is_a? Enumerable, so perhaps this isn't what you want... depends on your concept of an array like object.

11
votes

Try:

def is_array(a)
    a.class == Array
end

EDIT: The other answer is much better than mine.

6
votes

Also consider using Array(). From the Ruby Community Style Guide:

Use Array() instead of explicit Array check or [*var], when dealing with a variable you want to treat as an Array, but you're not certain it's an array.

# bad
paths = [paths] unless paths.is_a? Array
paths.each { |path| do_something(path) }

# bad (always creates a new Array instance)
[*paths].each { |path| do_something(path) }

# good (and a bit more readable)
Array(paths).each { |path| do_something(path) }