I was wondering if there's a way with Go to declare and initialise multiple variables of different types in one line without using the short declaration syntax :=.
Declaring for example two variables of the same type is possible:
var a, b string = "hello", "world"
Declaring variables of different types with the := syntax is also possible:
c, d, e := 1, 2, "whatever"
This gives me an error instead:
var f int, g string = 1, "test"
Of course I'd like to keep the type otherwise I can just use the := syntax.
Unfortunately I couldn't find any examples so I'm assuming this is just not possible?
If not, anyone knows if there's a plan to introduce such syntax in future releases?
It's possible if you omit the type:
var i, s = 2, "hi"
fmt.Println(i, s)
Output (try it on the Go Playground):
2 hi
Note that the short variable declaration is exactly a shorthand for this:
A short variable declaration uses the syntax:
ShortVarDecl = IdentifierList ":=" ExpressionList .
It is shorthand for a regular variable declaration with initializer expressions but no types:
"var" IdentifierList = ExpressionList .
Without omitting the type it's not possible, because the syntax of the variable declaration is:
VarSpec = IdentifierList ( Type [ "=" ExpressionList ] | "=" ExpressionList ) .
(There is only one optional type for an identifier list with an expression list.)
Also I assume you don't count this as 1 line (which otherwise is valid syntax, but gofmt breaks it into multiple lines):
var (i int = 2; s string = "hi")
Also if you only want to be able to explicitly state the types, you may provide them on the right side:
var i, s = int(2), string("hi")
But all in all, just use 2 lines for 2 different types, nothing to lose, readability to win.
This isn't exactly specific to the OP's question, but since it gets to appear in search results for declaring multiple vars in a single line (which isn't possible at the moment). A cleaner way for that is:
var (
n []int
m string
v reflect.Value
)
Related
The "GlobalScope" class defines many fundamental enums like the Error enum.
I'm trying to produce meaningful logs when an error occurs. However printing a value of type Error only prints the integer, which is not very helpful.
The Godot documentation on enums indicates that looking up the value should work in a dictionary like fashion. However, trying to access Error[error_value] errors with:
The identifier "Error" isn't declared in the current scope.
How can I convert such enum values to string?
In the documentation you referenced, it explains that enums basically just create a bunch of constants:
enum {TILE_BRICK, TILE_FLOOR, TILE_SPIKE, TILE_TELEPORT}
# Is the same as:
const TILE_BRICK = 0
const TILE_FLOOR = 1
const TILE_SPIKE = 2
const TILE_TELEPORT = 3
However, the names of the identifiers of these constants only exist to make it easier for humans to read the code. They are replaced on runtime with something the machine can use, and are inaccessible later. If I want to print an identifier's name, I have to do so manually:
# Manually print TILE_FLOOR's name as a string, then its value.
print("The value of TILE_FLOOR is ", TILE_FLOOR)
So if your goal is to have descriptive error output, you should do so in a similar way, perhaps like so:
if unexpected_bug_found:
# Manually print the error description, then actually return the value.
print("ERR_BUG: There was a unexpected bug!")
return ERR_BUG
Now the relationship with dictionaries is that dictionaries can be made to act like enumerations, not the other way around. Enumerations are limited to be a list of identifiers with integer assignments, which dictionaries can do too. But they can also do other cool things, like have identifiers that are strings, which I believe you may have been thinking of:
const MyDict = {
NORMAL_KEY = 0,
'STRING_KEY' : 1, # uses a colon instead of equals sign
}
func _ready():
print("MyDict.NORMAL_KEY is ", MyDict.NORMAL_KEY) # valid
print("MyDict.STRING_KEY is ", MyDict.STRING_KEY) # valid
print("MyDict[NORMAL_KEY] is ", MyDict[NORMAL_KEY]) # INVALID
print("MyDict['STRING_KEY'] is ", MyDict['STRING_KEY']) # valid
# Dictionary['KEY'] only works if the key is a string.
This is useful in its own way, but even in this scenario, we assume to already have the string matching the identifier name explicitly in hand, meaning we may as well print that string manually as in the first example.
The naive approach I done for me, in a Singleton (in fact in a file that contain a lot of static funcs, referenced by a class_name)
static func get_error(global_error_constant:int) -> String:
var info := Engine.get_version_info()
var version := "%s.%s" % [info.major, info.minor]
var default := ["OK","FAILED","ERR_UNAVAILABLE","ERR_UNCONFIGURED","ERR_UNAUTHORIZED","ERR_PARAMETER_RANGE_ERROR","ERR_OUT_OF_MEMORY","ERR_FILE_NOT_FOUND","ERR_FILE_BAD_DRIVE","ERR_FILE_BAD_PATH","ERR_FILE_NO_PERMISSION","ERR_FILE_ALREADY_IN_USE","ERR_FILE_CANT_OPEN","ERR_FILE_CANT_WRITE","ERR_FILE_CANT_READ","ERR_FILE_UNRECOGNIZED","ERR_FILE_CORRUPT","ERR_FILE_MISSING_DEPENDENCIES","ERR_FILE_EOF","ERR_CANT_OPEN","ERR_CANT_CREATE","ERR_QUERY_FAILED","ERR_ALREADY_IN_USE","ERR_LOCKED","ERR_TIMEOUT","ERR_CANT_CONNECT","ERR_CANT_RESOLVE","ERR_CONNECTION_ERROR","ERR_CANT_ACQUIRE_RESOURCE","ERR_CANT_FORK","ERR_INVALID_DATA","ERR_INVALID_PARAMETER","ERR_ALREADY_EXISTS","ERR_DOES_NOT_EXIST","ERR_DATABASE_CANT_READ","ERR_DATABASE_CANT_WRITE","ERR_COMPILATION_FAILED","ERR_METHOD_NOT_FOUND","ERR_LINK_FAILED","ERR_SCRIPT_FAILED","ERR_CYCLIC_LINK","ERR_INVALID_DECLARATION","ERR_DUPLICATE_SYMBOL","ERR_PARSE_ERROR","ERR_BUSY","ERR_SKIP","ERR_HELP","ERR_BUG","ERR_PRINTER_ON_FIR"]
match version:
"3.4":
return default[global_error_constant]
# Regexp to use on #GlobalScope documentation
# \s+=\s+.+ replace by nothing
# (\w+)\s+ replace by "$1", (with quotes and comma)
printerr("you must check and add %s version in get_error()" % version)
return default[global_error_constant]
So print(MyClass.get_error(err)), or assert(!err, MyClass.get_error(err)) is handy
For non globals I made this, though it was not your question, it is highly related.
It would be useful to be able to access to #GlobalScope and #GDScript, maybe due a memory cost ?
static func get_enum_flags(_class:String, _enum:String, flags:int) -> PoolStringArray:
var ret := PoolStringArray()
var enum_flags := ClassDB.class_get_enum_constants(_class, _enum)
for i in enum_flags.size():
if (1 << i) & flags:
ret.append(enum_flags[i])
return ret
static func get_constant_or_enum(_class:String, number:int, _enum:="") -> String:
if _enum:
return ClassDB.class_get_enum_constants(_class, _enum)[number]
return ClassDB.class_get_integer_constant_list(_class)[number]
So I have some json response content represented as string and I want to get its property names.
What I am doing
let properties = Newtonsoft.Json.Linq.JObject.Parse(responseContent).Properties()
let propertyNames, (jprop: JProperty) = properties.Select(jprop => jprop.Name);
According to this answer I needed to annotate the call to the extension method, however, I still get the error.
A unique overload for method 'Select' could not be determined based on type information prior to this program point. A type annotation may be needed. Candidates: (extension) Collections.Generic.IEnumerable.Select<'TSource,'TResult>(selector: Func<'TSource,'TResult>) : Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<'TResult>, (extension) Collections.Generic.IEnumerable.Select<'TSource,'TResult>(selector: Func<'TSource,int,'TResult>) : Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<'TResult>
Am I doing something wrong?
First, the syntax x => y you're trying to use is C# syntax for lambda expressions, not F# syntax. In F#, the correct syntax for lambda-expressions is fun x -> y.
Second, the syntax let a, b = c means "destructure the pair". For example:
let pair = (42, "foo")
let a, b = pair // Here, a = 42 and b = "foo"
You can provide a type annotation for one of the pair elements:
let a, (b: string) = pair
But this won't have any effect on pair the way you apparently expect it to work.
In order to provide type annotation for the argument of a lambda expression, just annotate the argument, what could be simpler?
fun (x: string) -> y
So, putting all of the above together, this is how your line should look:
let propertyNames = properties.Select(fun (jprop: JProperty) -> jprop.Name)
(also, note the absence of semicolon at the end. F# doesn't require semicolons)
If you have this level of difficulty with basic syntax, I suggest you read up on F# and work your way through a few examples before trying to implement something complex.
In order to learn XQuery I tried to run the following XQuery command in BaseX
let $x := doc("test.xq")//h2/following-sibling return $x::h2
I supposed it should be equivalent to
let $x := doc("test.xq")//h2/following-sibling::h2 return $x
But it gives the following error and doesn't work while the second command works
Error:
Stopped at D:/Program Files/BaseX/data/test.xq, 1/66:
[XPST0003] Unexpected end of query: '::h2'.
In general, how can I select some nodes (h2) in the context provided by a variable ($x := doc("test.xq")//h2/following-sibling)
That's not how variables work I'm afraid. It looks like you're trying to treat the variable declaration as a kind of "macro" and expecting its textual definition to be substituted in when the variable is referenced, but in fact XQuery variables are more like local variables in C or Java - the definition expression is evaluated to give a value or sequence and when you refer to the variable you get that value back.
So both the definition and referencing expressions need to be valid expressions in their own right. If you wanted to store the list of all following sibling elements in the variable and then later filter for just the h2 elements you'd need something like
let $x := doc("test.xq")//h2/following-sibling::* return $x[self::h2]
You can't separate the expression at that part, see following-sibling::h2 as one unit. You can do the following instead :
let $x := doc("test.xq")//h2 return $x/following-sibling::h2
I want to define a symbol and use it within a function. For example, with IDnumbers defined as a list of numbers:
ParallelMap[{#1, Name[#1], Age[#1]} &, IDnumbers]
With userlist={#1, Name[#1], Age[#1]} becomes:
ParallelMap[userlist &, IDnumbers]
It works just fine with the list itself in the code, but not with the symbol. The same thing happens with a list of strings vs. a symbol assigned to a list of strings. Why is this?
Since f[#]& is shorthand for Function[f[#]] you should always complete your anonymous function with a trailing & to get a working function.
In your example:
userlist={#1, Name[#1], Age[#1]}&
ParallelMap[userlist, IDnumbers]
More thorough explanation:
By just using something like f[#] you get (in FullForm[])
In[15] := f[#] // FullForm
Out[15]//FullForm = f[Slot[1]]
whereas this gets transformed to a Function by the trailing & operator:
In[16] := f[#]& // FullForm
Out[16]//FullForm = Function[f[Slot[1]]]
If you do this in two steps, & doesn't evaluate the intermediate variable expr:
In[25]:= expr = f[#]//FullForm
In[26]:= expr &
Out[25]//FullForm = f[Slot[1]]
Out[26] = expr &
You can force the evaluation of expr before it gets wrapped in the Function[] by using Evaluate[]:
In[27]:= expr=f[#]//FullForm
In[28]:= Evaluate[expr]&
Out[27]//FullForm = f[Slot[1]]
Out[28] = f[Slot[1]]&
Another way is to supply the Function[] wrapper yourself:
userlist={#1, Name[#1], Age[#1]}
ParallelMap[Function[userlist], IDnumbers]
Personally, i would consider this bad coding style. Just get used to always finishing an anonymous function with a trailing & like you would supply a closing paranthesis ) to a corresponding opening one (.
Edit
Ok, in your case of a dynamically generated anonymous function i can see why you couldn't supply the & directly. Just wrap the expression with the Slot[]s in a Function[] instead.
Where can I find a list of Scala's "magic" functions, such as apply, unapply, update, +=, etc.?
By magic-functions I mean functions which are used by some syntactic sugar of the compiler, for example
o.update(x,y) <=> o(x) = y
I googled for some combination of scala magic and synonyms of functions, but I didn't find anything.
I'm not interested with the usage of magic functions in the standard library, but in which magic functions exists.
As far as I know:
Getters/setters related:
apply
update
identifier_=
Pattern matching:
unapply
unapplySeq
For-comprehensions:
map
flatMap
filter
withFilter
foreach
Prefixed operators:
unary_+
unary_-
unary_!
unary_~
Beyond that, any implicit from A to B. Scala will also convert A <op>= B into A = A <op> B, if the former operator isn't defined, "op" is not alphanumeric, and <op>= isn't !=, ==, <= or >=.
And I don't believe there's any single place where all of Scala's syntactic sugars are listed.
In addition to update and apply, there are also a number of unary operators which (I believe) qualify as magical:
unary_+
unary_-
unary_!
unary_~
Add to that the regular infix/suffix operators (which can be almost anything) and you've got yourself the complete package.
You really should take a look at the Scala Language Specification. It is the only authoritative source on this stuff. It's not that hard to read (as long as you're comfortable with context-free grammars), and very easily searchable. The only thing it doesn't specify well is the XML support.
Sorry if it's not exactly answering your question, but my favorite WTF moment so far is # as assignment operator inside pattern match. Thanks to soft copy of "Programming in Scala" I found out what it was pretty quickly.
Using # we can bind any part of a pattern to a variable, and if the pattern match succeeds, the variable will capture the value of the sub-pattern. Here's the example from Programming in Scala (Section 15.2 - Variable Binding):
expr match {
case UnOp("abs", e # UnOp("abs", _)) => e
case _ =>
}
If the entire pattern match succeeds,
then the portion that matched the
UnOp("abs", _) part is made available
as variable e.
And here's what Programming Scala says about it.
That link no longer works. Here is one that does.
I'll also add _* for pattern matching on an arbitrary number of parameters like
case x: A(_*)
And operator associativity rule, from Odersky-Spoon-Venners book:
The associativity of an operator in Scala is determined by its last
character. As mentioned on <...>, any method that ends
in a ‘:’ character is invoked on its right operand, passing in the
left operand. Methods that end in any other character are the other
way around. They are invoked on their left operand, passing in the
right operand. So a * b yields a.*(b), but a ::: b yields b.:::(a).
Maybe we should also mention syntactic desugaring of for expressions which can be found here
And (of course!), alternative syntax for pairs
a -> b //converted to (a, b), where a and b are instances
(as correctly pointed out, this one is just an implicit conversion done through a library, so it's probably not eligible, but I find it's a common puzzler for newcomers)
I'd like to add that there is also a "magic" trait - scala.Dynamic:
A marker trait that enables dynamic invocations. Instances x of this trait allow method invocations x.meth(args) for arbitrary method names meth and argument lists args as well as field accesses x.field for arbitrary field names field.
If a call is not natively supported by x (i.e. if type checking fails), it is rewritten according to the following rules:
foo.method("blah") ~~> foo.applyDynamic("method")("blah")
foo.method(x = "blah") ~~> foo.applyDynamicNamed("method")(("x", "blah"))
foo.method(x = 1, 2) ~~> foo.applyDynamicNamed("method")(("x", 1), ("", 2))
foo.field ~~> foo.selectDynamic("field")
foo.varia = 10 ~~> foo.updateDynamic("varia")(10)
foo.arr(10) = 13 ~~> foo.selectDynamic("arr").update(10, 13)
foo.arr(10) ~~> foo.applyDynamic("arr")(10)
As of Scala 2.10, defining direct or indirect subclasses of this trait is only possible if the language feature dynamics is enabled.
So you can do stuff like
import scala.language.dynamics
object Dyn extends Dynamic {
def applyDynamic(name: String)(a1: Int, a2: String) {
println("Invoked " + name + " on (" + a1 + "," + a2 + ")");
}
}
Dyn.foo(3, "x");
Dyn.bar(3, "y");
They are defined in the Scala Language Specification.
As far as I know, there are just three "magic" functions as you mentioned.
Scalas Getter and Setter may also relate to your "magic":
scala> class Magic {
| private var x :Int = _
| override def toString = "Magic(%d)".format(x)
| def member = x
| def member_=(m :Int){ x = m }
| }
defined class Magic
scala> val m = new Magic
m: Magic = Magic(0)
scala> m.member
res14: Int = 0
scala> m.member = 100
scala> m
res15: Magic = Magic(100)
scala> m.member += 99
scala> m
res17: Magic = Magic(199)