Re: Blob problems
Hi Henrik, > I can't believe none of us noticed, this is the first example that > worked OK (the articles): > ... > (super This Key T) > Notice the "This" in the call to super... Oooh ;-) -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
I can't believe none of us noticed, this is the first example that worked OK (the articles): (dm put> (Key Val) (ifn (== Key 'body) (super Key Val) (super 'body T) (out (blob This 'body) (prinl Val) ) ) ) And this is the one that didnt' work (the article words): (dm put> (Key Val) (super This Key T) (out (blob This Key) (prinl Val))) Notice the "This" in the call to super... Changing to: (dm put> (Key Val) (super Key T) (out (blob This Key) (prinl Val))) Makes everything work like it should. /Henrik On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Alexander Burger wrote: > Hi Henrik, > > On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 08:34:36PM +0200, Alexander Burger wrote: >> ... >> > [test3.l:23] !? (has> (meta This Var) Val (get This Var)) >> > has> -- Bad message >> ... >> And what is 'Var', and - most important - (meta This Var). The latter >> one must be something which cannot handle 'has>'. > > Just tell us what these values are when you are at the error prompt. > Then we'll probably know what goes wrong. > > Cheers, > - Alex > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe > -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
Hi Henrik, On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 08:34:36PM +0200, Alexander Burger wrote: > ... > > [test3.l:23] !? (has> (meta This Var) Val (get This Var)) > > has> -- Bad message > ... > And what is 'Var', and - most important - (meta This Var). The latter > one must be something which cannot handle 'has>'. Just tell us what these values are when you are at the error prompt. Then we'll probably know what goes wrong. Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 07:26:27PM +0200, Henrik Sarvell wrote:
> I don't understand how a (show This) would show anything else but this
> in this case:
>
> [test3.l:23] !? (has> (meta This Var) Val (get This Var))
> has> -- Bad message
> ? (show This)
> {4-5v;} (+Awords)
> -> {4-5v;}
>
> If you check the earlier code listing you will see that +Awords is
> clearly a descendant of +Entity. I mean, this works perfectly for
> +Article (as per your instructions earlier), why it doesn't work for
> +Awords too is beyond me.
And what is 'Var', and - most important - (meta This Var). The latter
one must be something which cannot handle 'has>'.
So (meta This Var) is either NIL, or some relation object that doesn't
understand 'has>'. Something must be wrong in the class hierarchy.
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
I don't understand how a (show This) would show anything else but this
in this case:
[test3.l:23] !? (has> (meta This Var) Val (get This Var))
has> -- Bad message
? (show This)
{4-5v;} (+Awords)
-> {4-5v;}
If you check the earlier code listing you will see that +Awords is
clearly a descendant of +Entity. I mean, this works perfectly for
+Article (as per your instructions earlier), why it doesn't work for
+Awords too is beyond me.
/Henrik
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Alexander Burger wrote:
> Still it might be helpful to find out why 'has>' cannot be invoked:
>
>> >> !? (has> (meta This Var) Val (get This Var))
>> >> has> -- Bad message
>
> What is 'This'? It must be an object of a class (if any?) which is
> perhaps not an '+Entity', or where (meta This Var), the inheritance of
> the relation class, does not have a method for 'has>'. Perhaps this
> would be a hint then what's going wrong.
> --
> UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
>
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
Still it might be helpful to find out why 'has>' cannot be invoked: > >> !? (has> (meta This Var) Val (get This Var)) > >> has> -- Bad message What is 'This'? It must be an object of a class (if any?) which is perhaps not an '+Entity', or where (meta This Var), the inheritance of the relation class, does not have a method for 'has>'. Perhaps this would be a hint then what's going wrong. -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
I might be inclined to think something similar normally, but in this case the only difference is: (put!> This Key T) which works as opposed to (super This Key T) which doesn't. And that has absolutely nothing to do with A (an article). /Henrik On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Alexander Burger wro= te: > Hi Henrik, > >> (let Awords (new! '(+Awords)) >> =A0 (put> Awords 'words Words) >> =A0 (put> Awords 'counts (mapcar val Words)) >> =A0 (put> A 'words Awords)) > > 'A' probably is not an object of a class that knows about 'words'. > > >> However, I'm getting: >> !? (has> (meta This Var) Val (get This Var)) >> has> -- Bad message > > I also frequently get such an error, if some code does not match the E/R > definitions. I would type here > > =A0 : This > =A0 -> =A0 # Something which is the value of 'A' > > and > > =A0 : Var > =A0 -> words =A0# Probably 'words' > > In any case, when you know 'This' and 'Var', you usually have a clue > what went wrong. > > Cheers, > - Alex > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=3dunsubscribe > -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
Hi Henrik, > (let Awords (new! '(+Awords)) > (put> Awords 'words Words) > (put> Awords 'counts (mapcar val Words)) > (put> A 'words Awords)) 'A' probably is not an object of a class that knows about 'words'. > However, I'm getting: > !? (has> (meta This Var) Val (get This Var)) > has> -- Bad message I also frequently get such an error, if some code does not match the E/R definitions. I would type here : This -> # Something which is the value of 'A' and : Var -> words # Probably 'words' In any case, when you know 'This' and 'Var', you usually have a clue what went wrong. Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
It worked OK, and I realized I had another relation with the same setup:
(class +Awords +Entity)
(rel words (+Blob))
(rel counts (+Blob))
(dm put> (Key Val)
(put!> This Key T)
(out (blob This Key)
(prinl Val)))
The above works but I wanted to follow your advice on this one too, so
I changed it to:
(dm put> (Key Val)
(super This Key T)
(out (blob This Key)
(prinl Val)))
However, I'm getting:
!? (has> (meta This Var) Val (get This Var))
has> -- Bad message
When I run the code which is using the above like this:
(let Awords (new! '(+Awords))
(put> Awords 'words Words)
(put> Awords 'counts (mapcar val Words))
(put> A 'words Awords))
Any ides on why the "super" version isn't working out this time?
/Henrik
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Alexander Burger wro=
te:
> Hi Henrik,
>
>> (class +Article +Entity)
>> (rel aid =A0 =A0 =A0 (+Key +Number))
>> (rel title =A0 =A0 (+String))
>> (rel type =A0 =A0 =A0(+String))
>> (rel htmlUrl =A0 (+Key +String))
>> (rel body =A0 =A0 =A0(+Blob))
>>
>> (dm put> (Key Val)
>> =A0 =A0(if (=3D Key 'body)
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 (prog
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(put!> This 'body T)
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(out (blob This 'body)
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (prinl Val)))
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 (super Key Val)))
>
> I didn't try this code, and have no direct explanation why you get an
> error upon re-import, but I see a different problem:
>
> It is not good to nest 'put!>' within 'put>'. 'put!>' builds its own
> transaction with 'dbSync' and 'commit'. This means, that you get a
> preliminary 'commit', which will unlock the database too early.
> So the 'put!>' above should at least be a simple 'put>'. Then
> we might simply use 'super' instead:
>
> =A0 (dm put> (Key Val)
> =A0 =A0 =A0(ifn (=3D=3D Key 'body)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (super Key Val)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (super 'body T)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (out (blob This 'body)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(prinl Val) ) ) )
>
> As usual, this 'put>' must run in a transaction (surrounded by 'dbSync'
> and 'commit'), of course.
>
> I don't know if this solves the original problem though.
>
>
> The same situation ('put!>' inside 'lose!>') we have here:
>
>> (dm lose!> ()
>> =A0 =A0(call 'rm (blob This 'body))
>> =A0 =A0(put!> This 'body NIL)
>> =A0 =A0(super))
>
> In fact, I never directly remove blobs, and rely on the nightly garbage
> collection to have them cleaned up. So the above 'lose!>' method might
> simply be omitted.
>
> Cheers,
> - Alex
> --
> UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=3dunsubscribe
>
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:06:45AM +0200, Henrik Sarvell wrote: > I can't remember, didn't you go through that cron job script here in > the mailing list ... I think it was this one: http://www.mail-archive.com/picolisp@software-lab.de/msg00984.html Basically, all that is needed is (load "lib/too.l") (dbgc) Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
>>nightly garbage<<
I can't remember, didn't you go through that cron job script here in
the mailing list or was it on IRC, if it was on IRC maybe it would be
a good idea to do it here again?
Will change the put!> implementation, the error was on put so
hopefully that might take care of it...
/Henrik
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Alexander Burger wro=
te:
> Hi Henrik,
>
>> (class +Article +Entity)
>> (rel aid =A0 =A0 =A0 (+Key +Number))
>> (rel title =A0 =A0 (+String))
>> (rel type =A0 =A0 =A0(+String))
>> (rel htmlUrl =A0 (+Key +String))
>> (rel body =A0 =A0 =A0(+Blob))
>>
>> (dm put> (Key Val)
>> =A0 =A0(if (=3D Key 'body)
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 (prog
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(put!> This 'body T)
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(out (blob This 'body)
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (prinl Val)))
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 (super Key Val)))
>
> I didn't try this code, and have no direct explanation why you get an
> error upon re-import, but I see a different problem:
>
> It is not good to nest 'put!>' within 'put>'. 'put!>' builds its own
> transaction with 'dbSync' and 'commit'. This means, that you get a
> preliminary 'commit', which will unlock the database too early.
> So the 'put!>' above should at least be a simple 'put>'. Then
> we might simply use 'super' instead:
>
> =A0 (dm put> (Key Val)
> =A0 =A0 =A0(ifn (=3D=3D Key 'body)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (super Key Val)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (super 'body T)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (out (blob This 'body)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(prinl Val) ) ) )
>
> As usual, this 'put>' must run in a transaction (surrounded by 'dbSync'
> and 'commit'), of course.
>
> I don't know if this solves the original problem though.
>
>
> The same situation ('put!>' inside 'lose!>') we have here:
>
>> (dm lose!> ()
>> =A0 =A0(call 'rm (blob This 'body))
>> =A0 =A0(put!> This 'body NIL)
>> =A0 =A0(super))
>
> In fact, I never directly remove blobs, and rely on the nightly garbage
> collection to have them cleaned up. So the above 'lose!>' method might
> simply be omitted.
>
> Cheers,
> - Alex
> --
> UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=3dunsubscribe
>
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: Blob problems
Hi Henrik,
> (class +Article +Entity)
> (rel aid (+Key +Number))
> (rel title (+String))
> (rel type (+String))
> (rel htmlUrl (+Key +String))
> (rel body (+Blob))
>
> (dm put> (Key Val)
>(if (= Key 'body)
> (prog
> (put!> This 'body T)
> (out (blob This 'body)
> (prinl Val)))
> (super Key Val)))
I didn't try this code, and have no direct explanation why you get an
error upon re-import, but I see a different problem:
It is not good to nest 'put!>' within 'put>'. 'put!>' builds its own
transaction with 'dbSync' and 'commit'. This means, that you get a
preliminary 'commit', which will unlock the database too early.
So the 'put!>' above should at least be a simple 'put>'. Then
we might simply use 'super' instead:
(dm put> (Key Val)
(ifn (== Key 'body)
(super Key Val)
(super 'body T)
(out (blob This 'body)
(prinl Val) ) ) )
As usual, this 'put>' must run in a transaction (surrounded by 'dbSync'
and 'commit'), of course.
I don't know if this solves the original problem though.
The same situation ('put!>' inside 'lose!>') we have here:
> (dm lose!> ()
>(call 'rm (blob This 'body))
>(put!> This 'body NIL)
>(super))
In fact, I never directly remove blobs, and rely on the nightly garbage
collection to have them cleaned up. So the above 'lose!>' method might
simply be omitted.
Cheers,
- Alex
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
