[1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/szHJJ.png [2]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/8Oic4.png
There is an array, you need to pull the maximum value and its key from it. Each number from the array has its own key, and I need to pull exactly the one that is associated with the maximum number. With the help of regularity, I pulled out the numbers and through jsr 223, the sampler found the maximum number. Now the question is: how to extract the key of exactly the maximum number? Don't kick, a week since I started studying jmeter after lr, so I'm suffering. And the text was translated into English through a translator.
The key itself from part of the array (what needs to be pulled): dUUyTlFoUmhQMmExbCtFZ2VCY09uQT09LS1FK3lZbzJlakFUeEJoNlhCV3poRzV3PT0=--4814f46102fd5ecaf9f440be0a8925644927b3d0 described above the way to find the maximum number, in my case
the number 69, now i need to somehow find the key to the maximum number and then apply it in the request.
Part of the array:
dUUyTlFoUmhQMmExbCtFZ2VCY09uQT09LS1FK3lZbzJlakFUeEJoNlhCV3poRzV3PT0=--4814f46102fd5ecaf9f440be0a8925644927b3d0" /><label class="collection_radio_buttons" for="challenger_order_selected_duuytlfoumhqmmexbctfz2vcy09uqt09ls1fk3lzbzjlakfueejonlhcv3porzv3pt0--4814f46102fd5ecaf9f440be0a8925644927b3d0">69</label></span></div>```
You already have the value and even highlighted it in blue, just iterate through existing JMeter Variables values, get the match number and get the key which corresponds to the match number.
Example code:
for (int i = 1; i < (vars.get('maxValue_matchNr') as int); i++) {
if (vars.get('maxValue_' + i + '_g2').equals(vars.get('maxValue_max'))) {
vars.put('maxKey_max', vars.get('maxValue_' + i + '_g1'))
break;
}
}
You should be able to refer the extracted value as ${maxKey_max} where required.
Also using "regularity" for getting the values from HTML might not be the best idea, maybe it worth considering using CSS Selector Extractor instead?
Related
I'm working on a Scrabble assignment and I'm trying to assign values to letters. Like in Scrabble, A, E, I, O, U, L, N, S, T, R are all equal to 1. I had some help in figuring out how to add the score up once I assign values, but now I'm trying to figure out how to assign values. Is there a way to create one variable for all the values? That doesn't really make sense to me.
I was also thinking I could do an if-else statement. Like if the letter equals any of those letters, value = 1, else if the letter equals D or G, value = 2 and so on. There are 7 different scores so it's kind of annoying and not efficient, but I'm not really sure what a better way might be. I'm new to programming, a novice, so I'm looking for advice that takes my level into account.
I have started my program by reading words from a text file into an arraylist. I successfully printed the arraylist, so I know that part worked. Next I'm working on how to read each character of each word and assign a value. Last, I will figure out how to sort it.
it's me from the other question again. You can definitely do an if-statement, but if I'm not wrong Scrabble has 8 different values for letters, so you would need 8 “if”s and also since there are around 25 letters (depending on language) you would have to handle all 25 some way in the if-statements which would be quite clunky in my opinion.
I think the best option is to use a Hash-table. A hash-table is basically like a dictionary where you look up a key and get a value. So I would add each letter as a key and keep the corresponding value as the value. It would look like this:
//initialize empty hash map
Hashtable<String, Integer> letterScores = new Hashtable<>();
//now we can add values with "put"
letterScores.put("A",1)
letterScores.put("B",3)
letterScores.put("X",8)
//etc
To access an element from the hash table we can use the "get"-method.
//returns 1
letterScores.get("A")
So when looping through our word we would essentially get something like this to calculate the value of the word:
int sumValue = 0;
for(int i =0; i < word.length(); i++)}
sumValue += letterScores.get(word.charAt(i))
}
For each character we grab the value entry from the letterScores hash table where we have saved all our letter's corresponding values.
I am trying to find index of an element in x_norm array with np.where() but it doesn' t work well.
Is there a way to find index of element?
x_norm = np.linspace(-10,10,1000)
np.where(x_norm == -0.19019019)
Np.where works with np.arange() and can find the index either first or last element of array creating by linspace.
The numbers generated by np.linspace contains more decimal places than the one you are pasting to np.where (-0.19019019019019012).
So it might be better to use np.argmin to find the nearest value and avoid rounding errors:
x_norm = np.linspace(-10,10,1000)
yournumber=-0.19019019
idx=np.argmin(np.abs(x_norm-yournumber))
You can then go further and add np.where(x_norm==x_norm[idx]) to your code in case if you'll have array with duplicates.
Set the level of precision to 8 using np.round then use np.where to filter data as a mask then apply the mask to the array.
x_norm = np.round(np.asarray(np.linspace(-10,10,1000)),8)
results=x_norm[np.where(x_norm==-9.91991992)]
print(results)
Here is the problem, where I need to transform an ID (defined as a long integer) to a smaller alfanumeric identifier. The details are the following:
Each individual on the problem as an unique ID, a long integer of size 13 (something like 123123412341234).
I need to generate a smaller representation of this unique ID, a alfanumeric string, something like A1CB3X. The problem is that 5 or 6 character length will not be enough to represent such a large integer.
The new ID (eg A1CB3X) should be valid in a context where we know that only a small number of individuals are present (less than 500). The new ID should be unique within that small set of individuals.
The new ID (eg A1CB3X) should be the result of a calculation made over the original ID. This means that taking the original ID elsewhere and applying the same calculation, we should get the same new ID (eg A1CB3X).
This calculation should occur when the individual is added to the set, meaning that not all individuals belonging to that set will be know at that time.
Any directions on how to solve such a problem?
Assuming that you don't need a formula that goes in both directions (which is impossible if you are reducing a 13-digit number to a 5 or 6-character alphanum string):
If you can have up to 6 alphanumeric characters that gives you 366 = 2,176,782,336 possibilities, assuming only numbers and uppercase letters.
To map your larger 13-digit number onto this space, you can take a modulo of some prime number slightly smaller than that, for example 2,176,782,317, the encode it with base-36 encoding.
alphanum_id = base36encode(longnumber_id % 2176782317)
For a set of 500, this gives you a
2176782317P500 / 2176782317500 chance of a collision
(P is permutation)
Best option is to change the base to 62 using case sensitive characters
If you want it to be shorter, you can add unicode characters. See below.
Here is javascript code for you: https://jsfiddle.net/vewmdt85/1/
function compress(n) {
var symbols = 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzÀÁÂÃÄÅÆÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÐÑÒÓÔÕÖØÙÚÛÜÝÞßàáâãäåæçèéêëìíîïð'.split('');
var d = n;
var compressed = '';
while (d >= 1) {
compressed = symbols[(d - (symbols.length * Math.floor(d / symbols.length)))] + compressed;
d = Math.floor(d / symbols.length);
}
return compressed;
}
$('input').keyup(function() {
$('span').html(compress($(this).val()))
})
$('span').html(compress($('input').val()))
How about using some base-X conversion, for example 123123412341234 becomes 17N644R7CI in base-36 and 9999999999999 becomes 3JLXPT2PR?
If you need a mapping that works both directions, you can simply go for a larger base.
Meaning: using base 16, you can reduce 1 to 16 to a single character.
So, base36 is the "maximum" that allows for shorter strings (when 1-1 mapping is required)!
I am trying to solve a simple problem, but at the moment I cannot think of a better solution. I am testing an API that is not documented.
There is an ID used to fetch objects and it has a min and max value with random values missing in-between. I'm trying to test the responses I receive for random objects, but to find objects, I need to have valid IDs.
It would be very inefficient to test random numbers and hope that I get an object back. The best I can do is find a range, get a random number between that range and check if it exists before conducting tests.
A sample list of all of the IDs in the database might look like this:
[1005, 25984, 25986, 29587, 30000, ...]
Assuming the deviation from one value to another will never exceed C, e.g. from the first value to the next value, the difference will never be greater than a pre-defined constant, how would you calculate the min/max of the range given only one value in the range?
Starting from a given value and looping until the last value is found is horrible but that is how it was implemented by previous devs. Below is pseudocode that more or less covers what they do.
// this can be any valid object ID from the database
// assuming the ID's in the database are [1005, 25984, 25986, 29587, 30000]
// "i" could be any one of these values
var i = givenPredefinedObjectId;
var deviation = 100;
// objectWithIdExists() is going to lookup an object with the ID "i" in the database
// if there is no object with the ID "i" , it will return false
// otherwise the object will get tested and return true
while(objectWithIdExists(i)){
i++;
}
for(i; i < i+deviation; i++){
if(objectWithIdExists(i)){
goto while loop;
}
}
endPoint = i - deviation;
Assuming there is no knowledge about the possible values except you can check if they exist and you are given one valid value (there is no array with all possible IDs, that was just an example), how would you find the min/max values?
Unbounded binary search is feasible, with a factor of C slowdown. Given an algorithm for unbounded binary search that, given access to the oracle less_equal(n) for some natural number n, returns n in time O(log n), implement the oracle on input k by querying all of the IDs C*k, C*k+1, ..., C*k+C-1 and reporting that k is less than or equal to n if and only if one ID is found. The running time is O(C*log((max-min)/C)).
I'm kinda new to XPath and I've found that to get the max attribute number I can use the next statement: //Book[not(#id > //Book/#id) and it works quite well.
I just can't understand why does it return max id instead of min id, because it looks like I'm checking whether id of a node greater than any other nodes ids and then return a Book where it's not.
I'm probably stupid, but, please, someone, explain :)
You're not querying for maximum values, but for minimum values. Your query
//Book[not(#id > //Book/#id)
could be translated to natural language as "Find all books, which do not have an #id that is larger than any other book's #id". You probably want to use
//Book[not(#id < //Book/#id)
For arbitrary input you might have wanted to use <= instead, so it only returns a single maximum value (or none if it is shared). As #ids must be unique, this does not matter here.
Be aware that //Book[#id > //Book/#id] is not equal to the query above, although math would suggest so. XPath's comparison operators adhere to a kind of set-semantics: if any value on the left side is larger than any value on the right side, the predicate would be true; thus it would include all books but the one with minimum #id value.
Besides XPath 1.0 your function is correct, in XPath 2.0:
/Books/Book[id = max(../Book/id)]
The math:max function returns the maximum value of the nodes passed as the argument. The maximum value is defined as follows. The node set passed as an argument is sorted in descending order as it would be by xsl:sort with a data type of number. The maximum is the result of converting the string value of the first node in this sorted list to a number using the number function.
If the node set is empty, or if the result of converting the string values of any of the nodes to a number is NaN, then NaN is returned.
The math:max template returns a result tree fragment whose string value is the result of turning the number returned by the function into a string.