red/red

Red Programming Language main room

LFReD

@LFReD

When I check the length of :db before the save, it's correct, so it's in the writing to %db.txt that something happens.

Gregg Irwin

@greggirwin

Is the file at any suspicious size? Will try to dupe soon if nobody else does.

LFReD

@LFReD

512 KB (524,290 bytes

Seems like a fairly suspicious size .5 mb

LFReD

@LFReD

length? db
== 75003
saveit
length? dbsave
== 75003
%db.txt file size : 524,290 bytes

Something going on here:
save %db.txt dbsave

Gregg Irwin

@greggirwin

What happens if you save to a string or binary (check then length) and write that out?

If your db is a block, you need to mold it to see the length as it will be written.

LFReD

@LFReD

Ok. I think I fixed by replacing the saveit function with this

saveit: does [
    save/all %db.txt db
    ]

Which also answers my question "not sure that's the best way..."

LFReD

@LFReD

After further testing, there's a new issue. Using the new saveit function and loading it back again.

Rebol2
kk: load %delme.txt
== make hash! ["one" "two" "three"]

Red
kk: load %delme.txt
Syntax Error: invalid issue! at {#[hash!["one" "two" "three"]]}
Where: do
Stack: load

Also when I use save/all %db.txt db
when I view the first bit of the db.txt file..

Rebol
.. #[hash!["user1" "pred1" "val1" "user2" "pred2"

Red
.. make hash! ["user1" "pred1" "val1" "user2"

(forget the two dots.. how do you escape the Gitter markup?)

hiiamboris

@hiiamboris

Please use https://gitter.im/red/bugs room for bugs discussion and when you're sure you've found a bug, post it our tracker: https://github.com/red/red/issues/new?template=bug_report.md

Oldes Huhuman

@Oldes

@LFReD I suppose you are trying to load hash! saved from Rebol into Red. But Red does not fully implemented the serialization format (the one using: #[...]). So far it supports only #[true],#[false] and #[none].

Btw.. you can use mold/all to see what is the string result used by save/all.

Oldes Huhuman

@Oldes

@LFReD and I'm not able to reproduce your loading issue...

>> db
== ["user1" "pred1" "val1" "user2" "pred2" "val2" "user3" "pred3" "val3" "user4" "pred4" "val4" "user5" "pred5" "val...
>> save %/a/db.txt db
>> length? db
== 75000
>> length? load %/a/db.txt
== 75000

LFReD

@LFReD

Continuing this in red/bugs..

LFReD

@LFReD

Regarding that bug. I was using the older binary from the red-lang site.. using latest build and it works fine.

LFReD

@LFReD

Ah, I've heard bits and pieces about a /pro version of Red? Any docs on that or deets?

Gregg Irwin

@greggirwin

Not at this time.

LFReD

@LFReD

ooh, now I'm really intrigued! :P

Gregg Irwin

@greggirwin

I don't do Go, so would have to read up on the struct/def format, but it seems like we could do a nice data-driven version of this in Red for the Gophers. Their binary is 30M for Linux, and 45M for Windows. We could save them some bandwidth. :^)

LFReD

@LFReD

Any chance of variable length arguments with Red func?

Gregg Irwin

@greggirwin

Nope. Use a block.

Just added a note to this wiki page for it: https://github.com/red/red/wiki/%5BDOC%5D-Red-Should...-(Feature-Wars)

GiuseppeChillemi

@GiuseppeChillemi

I find myselft using really often the the /skip refinement with select. Having a block like the following (or any one treated as record)

myblock: [
     key1 value1 value2 value3
     key2 value1 value2 value3
     key3 value1 value2 value3
     key4 value1 value2 value3
     key5 value1 value2 value3
]

Select/skip can't select anything other than the the first column: value1, which is quite limiting.

I see useful removing this limit adding an additional /pos (or /offset) integer refinement to select so instead of the first value, any other could be selected! Without /skip the pos/offset refinement should return the nth value after the key.

Jose Luis

@planetsizecpu

Block works well for me:

>> my_func: function [params [block!]][foreach x params [print x]]
== func [params [block!] /local x][foreach x params [print x]]

>> ? my_func
USAGE:
     MY_FUNC params

DESCRIPTION: 
     MY_FUNC is a function! value.

ARGUMENTS:
     params       [block!] 

>> my_func ["one" "two" "three"]
one
two
three
>>

xqlab

@xqlab

@GiuseppeChillemi Does this help

>> copy/part find/skip myblock [key2 value1]  4 4
== [
    key2 value1 value2 value3
]

or this

>> third find/skip myblock [key2 value1]  4 
== value2

Gregg Irwin

@greggirwin

@GiuseppeChillemi select already has a lot of refinements, and what you want is easy to do at the mezzanine level. It also makes sense, in many cases, to use sub blocks.

hiiamboris

@hiiamboris

With such a fixed table one shouldn't use select at all, as it'll be slow. Hash is the way to go ;)

GiuseppeChillemi

@GiuseppeChillemi

@xqlab Thanks, I already use a solution like this. I suggested this improvement to Select because, using Gregg's term, "it makes sense". Having a block treated as a record with elements and you can only select the first one, is limiting.

GiuseppeChillemi

@GiuseppeChillemi

@greggirwin from your experience, in presence of a SKIP refinement, do you could think it could be possible to be considered as key an element different from the first one?

Rudolf Meijer

@meijeru

Why not use find/skip?

GiuseppeChillemi

@GiuseppeChillemi

@meijeru because the selection phrase using find would be long and also the intent is having a select not limited to the first column but capable of retrieveing the others composing the record.

@meijeru it is really useful when you have external database tables stored in a block and you need to select an item:

The first feature let you access any column, the second one let you use any column as key.

Toomas Vooglaid

@toomasv

@GiuseppeChillemi Why not do it? Something like this:

mydata: make hash! [
     key1 value11 value12 value13
     key2 value21 value22 value23
     key3 value31 value32 value33
     key4 value41 value42 value43
     key5 value51 value52 value53
]
myselect: func [data key len pos][
    pick find/skip data key len pos
]
myselect mydata 'key1 4 1
;== key1
myselect mydata 'key1 4 3
;== value12
myselect mydata 'key3 4 2
;== value31
myselect mydata 'key5 4 4
;== value53

GiuseppeChillemi

@GiuseppeChillemi

@toomasv good! Why not implementing it in select? It's seems so easy!

Toomas Vooglaid

@toomasv

Because it is so easy !?

GiuseppeChillemi

@GiuseppeChillemi

@toomasv 😁 because you do not have to learn another word and it's syntax and select will become a very powerful command? (promise I will not continue!)

Toomas Vooglaid

@toomasv

IOW "Red should do everything I think it might do." You are going to rob programmers their job :imp:

GiuseppeChillemi

@GiuseppeChillemi

@toomasv (hovever, thank you for your implementation)

Toomas Vooglaid

@toomasv

:smile:

It's like Lego. If you have an idea, you put pieces together to realize it, not write a letter to Lego Company to do it.

GiuseppeChillemi

@GiuseppeChillemi

@toomasv Yes but Legos once where sufficient to create some buildings, now you can create and drive full robots. That's because mother house has not stopped receiving and implementing suggestions and ideas.

GiuseppeChillemi

@GiuseppeChillemi

I see find too could receive the same improvement. You could find on different position than the first one of the /SKIP group.

I will write a request for both.

hiiamboris

@hiiamboris

find already supports that

this code searches by the 4th column

Where communities thrive

People

Repo info

Activity