On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry Geoff I just don't follow your logic. Just because one doesn't exist
why shouldn't the others? If I understand your logic, which clearly I
don't, you are suggesting that because LC can create and count multiple
Thanks for the Link, an excellent discussion.
Marks Waddingham's statement:
If you want to be able to represent a nullable string list of any number of
empty items from 0
is like saying:
If you want to be able to represent a nullable array of any number of empty
keys from 0 ???
If you put
Wouldn't this mean that:
the number of items of test -- puts zero
And by extension:
the number of words of test -- puts zero
the number of lines of test -- puts zero
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 14, 2013, at 7:03 AM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote:
If you put empty into an
Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the Link, an excellent discussion.
Marks Waddingham's statement:
If you want to be able to represent a nullable string list of any
number of
empty items from 0
is like saying:
If you want to be able to represent a nullable array of any
Geoff Canyon gcan...@gmail.com wrote:
Wouldn't this mean that:
the number of items of test -- puts zero
And by extension:
the number of words of test -- puts zero
the number of lines of test -- puts zero
.
And the number of items in empty is one.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay
Kay-
Wednesday, August 14, 2013, 5:03:48 AM, you wrote:
I very much like Mark Wieder's proposal. I also like how he's debunked
speculation as to imminent failure if empty last items were actually
counted as an item. On the other hand it's pretty easy to prove that LC's
current bipolar
Sorry Geoff I just don't follow your logic. Just because one doesn't exist
why shouldn't the others? If I understand your logic, which clearly I
don't, you are suggesting that because LC can create and count multiple
empty lines, and create and count multiple empty items, it should be able
to
On 8/14/13 7:51 PM, Kay C Lan wrote:
Mark's suggested
addition seems a win win to me, it gives the option to count items
differently and I don't have to do anything ;-)
But do keep reading the forum thread, as runrevmark has pointed out some
issues with it that could cause trouble with
On 8/13/13 9:01 PM, Kay C Lan wrote:
Now I don't want to have LC behave that way, I like the fact that LC
recognises 1,2,3 as a 3 item list, I just wish it would be logical enough
to recognise ,2, as a 3 item list with 2 empty items.
Mark Waddingham explains much better than I did why things
On 12/08/2013, at 03:17 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Terry-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 8:54:28 PM, you wrote:
I agree with Mark that there are four lines there. The last one just happens
to be empty.
Terry...
I do think that's a matter of semantics of the visual display, though,
and
Terry-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 11:04:26 PM, you wrote:
Agreed - for practical purposes it's only 3 - although I still
can't get out of the habit of deleting the trailing delimiter from a
constructed list before processing it in a repeat loop.
I do too. And for that reason, neither of us
On Aug 12, 2013, at 10:51 AM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Terry-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 11:04:26 PM, Terry Judd wrote:
Agreed - for practical purposes it's only 3 - although I still
can't get out of the habit of deleting the trailing delimiter from a
constructed list before processing it in a
Devin-
Monday, August 12, 2013, 10:30:29 AM, you wrote:
You know how I get rid of trailing delimiters?
put line 1 to -1 of tList into tList
put item 1 to -1 of tItems into tItems
Kills that dang dangling delimiter dead.
Good one. I just opt for the chomp approach
repeat while item
Mark,
That won't work because LC won't recognize the last item as empty. Thus
put a, into goop
delete item -1 of goop
put goop
will end up putting empty.
I really want to fix this thing.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote:
Devin-
Monday, August 12,
Mike-
Monday, August 12, 2013, 11:11:31 AM, you wrote:
Mark,
That won't work because
Yep. Typing without thinking on my end.
Need. More. Coffee.
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Another way:
if char -1 of tList is the itemdelimiter then delete char -1 of tList
For short lists, item 1 to -1 is faster. For long lists the above gets to
be perhaps 5x faster.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Devin Asay devin_a...@byu.edu wrote:
On Aug 12, 2013, at 10:51 AM, Mark
Geoff,
I haven't messed with it, but does last char have the same performance as
char -1?
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Geoff Canyon gcan...@gmail.com wrote:
Another way:
if char -1 of tList is the itemdelimiter then delete char -1 of tList
For short lists, item 1 to -1 is faster.
Just did a quick test with 1m lines getting the last char of each (for each
line loop) using -1 and last, last is faster. 266 milliseconds for last
char.. and 318 for char -1
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.comwrote:
Geoff,
I haven't messed with it, but does
Here's what I've ended up with. Thanks to everyone for all the
discussion. I think it's a pretty elegant solution, doesn't change any
existing scripts, and avoids conflicting stack properties.
http://forums.runrev.com/viewtopic.php?f=66t=16383p=82961#p82961
--
-Mark Wieder
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Mike Bonner bonnm...@gmail.com wrote:
Just did a quick test with 1m lines getting the last char of each (for each
line loop) using -1 and last, last is faster. 266 milliseconds for last
char.. and 318 for char -1
Confirmed here. In my test I was getting
On 8/11/13 4:30 PM, Kay C Lan wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:34 AM, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.comwrote:
When you think of it that way, it all falls into place.
Not really. In the Message Box:
put 1,1,3,2,1,4 into tStore
put tStore into msg
put empty into item -1 of tStore
put cr
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:47 PM, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.comwrote:
Lines are easier to grok:
This is line 1 cr -- cr is part of line 1
This is line 2 cr -- cr is part of line 2
This is line 3 cr -- cr is part of line 3
Yeah but if you put that text into a scrolling field then
From: Peter Haworth
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:47 PM, J. Landman Gay
jac...@hyperactivesw.comwrote:
Lines are easier to grok:
This is line 1 cr -- cr is part of line 1
This is line 2 cr -- cr is part of line 2
This is line 3 cr -- cr is part of line 3
Yeah but if you put that
Paul-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 4:20:35 PM, you wrote:
I wonder if anyone actually relies on that ability. If not, perhaps THAT
should be changed, since it appears to be the one glaring inconsistency that
can't be resolved by looking at things differently.
Jacque has pointed out on the web
Jacque-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 2:47:18 PM, you wrote:
This is line 1 cr -- cr is part of line 1
This is line 2 cr -- cr is part of line 2
Here are three items:
item 1,
item 2,
item 3,
They work the same way.
Yes, and with the same problems. The problems occur when you have a
I still like Mark's idea of having a global property. There are a lot of
us that started using HC wy back before v. 2.1 came
along. Some have legacy stacks that we don't want to change (See Jacque)
and some of us have no qualms fixing any lingering issues that might come
up
Mike-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 5:57:12 PM, you wrote:
I still like Mark's idea of having a global property.
I think Monte's right in that it makes more sense to make this a stack
property rather than a global property. That way existing stacks don't
have to be changed but you can make new
On 12/08/2013, at 10:57 AM, Mike Kerner wrote:
A global property lets everyone do it their own way.
No it doesn't. What if you want to use one of Jacque's plugins? That's why I
suggested a stack property just like HCAddressing... HCChunkBehavior or
HCDelimiterCounting are my favourite
Mark Wieder wrote:
1,2,3 -- this contains three items
1,2,3, -- this contains three items
1,2,3, -- this contains four items
Let's look at those strings from the point of view of what we might
presume was that of the HyperTalk design team, but besting them by using
Jacque's suggestion of
Richard-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 6:22:47 PM, you wrote:
x|x|x -- this contains three items
x|x|x| -- this contains three items
unless, of course, the trailing space is considered part of the
string, in which case that last line has four items.
x|x|x|x -- this contains four items
The
Mark Wieder wrote:
Richard-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 6:22:47 PM, you wrote:
x|x|x -- this contains three items
x|x|x| -- this contains three items
unless, of course, the trailing space is considered part of the
string, in which case that last line has four items.
x|x|x|x -- this
On 8/11/13 7:35 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Yes, and with the same problems. The problems occur when you have a
situation like
This is line 1 cr
This is line 2 crcr -- there are still only two lines
The engine says that's 3 lines, which is consistent with final terminators.
1,2,3 -- this
On 8/11/13 8:22 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
One simple solution would be to add lineTerminator and
itemTerminator as synonyms for lineDelimiter and itemDelimiter
respectively, and then the conceptual model fits what the engine does.
We leave the *delimter tokens in place for us ol' timers, but
Monte, Mark,
Yes, I think I like a stack/script property better, too. Great idea.
Jacque and Richard...
So you're basically thinking we should change words, not the behavior? Why
not just change the documentation, then? In the meantime, if the behavior
is to be left alone, there are a variety
Jacque-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote:
put this is line 1 cr into field 1
put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1
put the number of lines in field 1
-- but there are actually four lines in field 1.
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
Mike Kerner wrote:
Jacque and Richard...
So you're basically thinking we should change words, not the behavior? Why
not just change the documentation, then? In the meantime, if the behavior
is to be left alone, there are a variety of functions (especially the
database functions) that have to
On 8/11/13 9:55 PM, Mike Kerner wrote:
Also remember that text editors don't behave this way, either. Empty
CR's at the end of a line still trigger a page break. That seems far
more correct than having to figure out of a delimiter/terminator should be
significant or not.
Empty crs in
Mark Wieder wrote:
Jacque-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote:
put this is line 1 cr into field 1
put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1
put the number of lines in field 1
-- but there are actually four lines in field 1.
With x as data and | as the terminator, the above gives
On 8/11/13 10:10 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Jacque-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote:
put this is line 1 cr into field 1
put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1
put the number of lines in field 1
-- but there are actually four lines in field 1.
No, there's only three lines, but
On 8/11/13 10:33 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
On 8/11/13 10:10 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Jacque-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote:
put this is line 1 cr into field 1
put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1
put the number of lines in field 1
-- but there are actually four lines in
Jacque-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 8:33:19 PM, you wrote:
No, there's only three lines, but the insertion point is placed after
the text, where the next potential line will start.
OK. Got it.
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
___
On 12/08/2013, at 01:33 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
On 8/11/13 10:10 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Jacque-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote:
put this is line 1 cr into field 1
put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1
put the number of lines in field 1
-- but there are actually
Richard-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:19:23 PM, you wrote:
Exactly. I was just being kind to the ol' timers. :)
LOL.
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to
Terry-
Sunday, August 11, 2013, 8:54:28 PM, you wrote:
I agree with Mark that there are four lines there. The last one just happens
to be empty.
Terry...
I do think that's a matter of semantics of the visual display, though,
and that's a different thing from the mechanics of how items,
Mike-
Opened for discussion at
http://forums.runrev.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=66t=16383
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
This seems like something the new language parser could fix for you.
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 8, 2013, at 7:30 PM, Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.com wrote:
I know I'm stuck with it, but I wish there was a preference that I could
tick.
___
On 08/08/2013 14:44, Mike Kerner wrote:
I would LOVE to discuss fixing the bizarre way empty last items are
treated, starting with either having a preference to modify the behavior,
separate functions/commands, or tweaking the database library so I don't
have to deal with this all the time.
Hi
From: Ben Rubinstein
It's easier to see with items, and I think it is consistent:
number of items in , --- 1
number of items in ,, --- 2
number of items in ,,a --- 3
number of items in ,,a, --- 3
item 2 to 3 of a,b,c,d --- b,c
If you take this model:
- that the delimiters are
Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
From: Ben Rubinstein
...
are there any examples of LC behaviour which are inconsistent with it?
YES. A listbox that has a return at the end of its contents allows the user
to select a blank item following the last visible item. When building up the
contents of the
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Richard Gaskin
ambassa...@fourthworld.comwrote:
My favorite annoyance with xTalks is the decision by the HyperTalk team to
allow some functions to be called as though they're properties - but not
all. You can say get the abs of -10 or abs(-10), and you can say
On 8/8/13 12:45 PM, Ben Rubinstein wrote:
I think the return (or equally the comma when dealing with items)
doesn't belong to the line that it terminates (as I tend to think of
it) - or indeed to the line that follows it (as perhaps you do); it is,
indeed just a delimiter.
My mental model is
Geoff Canyon wrote:
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
My favorite annoyance with xTalks is the decision by the HyperTalk team to
allow some functions to be called as though they're properties - but not
all. You can say get the abs of -10 or abs(-10), and you can say get
I agree with Jacque's construct. I was thrown,long ago, with the number of
items, say, in:
1,2,3,4,
That last comma should indicate a placeholder for a fifth item at the end of
the string, but there are in fact only four. One could say that since the last
comma precedes empty. The number
We also had this debate on several bug reports at quality.runrev.com, so
you will find much of this hashed out over there, over several bug
reports. Excuse me while I wax extemporaneously for a moment.
My fellow LiveCoders, I implore you, to reach within your souls and ask
yourselves, are not
That was some damn fine writing, my friend.
There's too much code floating around for the delimiter behavior to
change, but your most excellent post earned you a dinner next time
you're in LA, or at RevLive in San Diego next year. It would be my
pleasure.
Yep, xTalk is sometimes funky,
I know I'm stuck with it, but I wish there was a preference that I could
tick. Sometimes I even wish I was actually good at C so I could take the
source and fix it.
No, wait. Maybe I can fund forking it just for the sake of fixing that one
thing.
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Richard Gaskin
Too badd I mizspeld Atkinson. OMG #FAIL
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.comwrote:
I know I'm stuck with it, but I wish there was a preference that I could
tick. Sometimes I even wish I was actually good at C so I could take the
source and fix it.
No,
57 matches
Mail list logo
