skosch
Put/update deep inside nested maps (and auto-create intermediate keys)
To my knowledge, put_in, Map.update etc. all have the one limitation of not automatically creating intermediate keys when needed (for example, put_in(%{a: %{}}, [:a, :b, :c], 42) will fail). But – despite all the risks – this would be useful to have: for instance, I often use reduce to create a nested, aggregate representation of a list of complex objects (say, counting occurrences by categories and sub-categories), which is a one-liner when you don’t have to worry about intermediate keys (think mkdir -p).
The implementation is simple enough (see deep_update example below, which I’m already using all over my projects). I have a nagging feeling this must already be part of Elixir’s standard library and I just don’t know about it? If not, is there a particular reason it isn’t?
%spec deep_update(map(), [any()], any(), any() -> any()) :: map()
def deep_update(map, [leaf_key], default, update_func) do
updated_leaf = if is_map(map) and Map.has_key?(map, leaf_key) do
update_func.(map[leaf_key])
else
default
end
Map.put(map, leaf_key, updated_leaf)
end
def deep_update(map, [key | key_tail], default, update_func) do
if is_map(map) and Map.has_key?(map, key) do
new_branch = deep_update(map[key], key_tail, default, update_func)
Map.put(map, key, new_branch)
else
new_branch = deep_update(%{}, key_tail, default, update_func)
Map.put(map, key, new_branch)
end
end
Marked As Solved
michalmuskala
You can achieve this today using Access.key/2:
put_in(%{a: %{}}, Enum.map([:a, :b, :c], &Access.key(&1, %{})), 42)
If you use it often, you could wrap it in a function to do this automatically for you.
Also Liked
jonericcook
@skosch from reading the solutions here i did this (thougt id share for the next person)
def map_put(data, keys, value) do
# data = %{} or non empty map
# keys = [:a, :b, :c]
# value = 3
put_in(data, Enum.map(keys, &Access.key(&1, %{})), value)
end
def many_map_puts(data, keys_values) do
# data = %{} or non empty map
# keys_values = [[keys: [:a, :b, :c], value: 4],[keys: [:z, :y, :x], value: 90]]
Enum.reduce(keys_values, data, fn x, data ->
map_put(data, x[:keys], x[:value])
end)
end
iex(1)> m = [[keys: [:a, :b, :c], value: 4],[keys: [:z, :y, :x], value: 90]]
[[keys: [:a, :b, :c], value: 4], [keys: [:z, :y, :x], value: 90]]
iex(2)> many_map_puts(%{}, m)
%{a: %{b: %{c: 4}}, z: %{y: %{x: 90}}}
peerreynders
Not entirely sure if this addresses what you are trying to accomplish but have you had a look at Kernel.put_in/3, Kernel.get_and_update_in/3 and the like - and Access behavior?
peerreynders
So if I understand you correctly you want
put_in(%{a: %{}}, [:a, :b, :c], 42)
to result in
%{a: %{b: %{c: 42)} } }
One problem I see is that you are assuming that :b should refer to a Map value i.e. that the nested structure is a homogenous Map. The Access data[key] syntax is right out of the box also supported by Keyword lists - and any other structure that cares to implement the Access behaviour so there is some ambiguity right there - just because there is a key doesn’t automatically mean it should be a Map.
Popular in Questions
Other popular topics
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #deployment
- #library
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #channels
- #elixirconf
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #javascript
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #blog-post
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #ai
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #elixirconf-us
- #distillery
- #processes
- #forms
- #api
- #metaprogramming
- #security
- #performance








