'OR' Syntax in (g)Lua - syntax

I have limited knowledge of lua and would like to make an or statement.
However, I don't know the exact syntax.
Would the code below work correctly?
if text == "/teamspeak" or text == "/ts" then
If not please let me know on the correct syntax of the statement.

Yes, the statements are correct. You do not have any syntactical errors there, though you might want to check whether text contains only the command or the whole string (as is the case with ptokax). You might also want to check that the command is uppercase/lowercase or mixed-casing.
local sCmd = text:lower()
if sCmd == "/ts" or sCmd == "/teamspeak" then
...
end

Lua uses the keyword or for or statements.
I recommend reading the Lua language reference.
Your code would work correctly if you terminate the if then statement with end.
Best way is to try it yourself. If you do not have Lua installed you can use http://www.lua.org/demo.html
And please note that nil is not the same as false! Many Lua beginners have problems here.

That statement should work, though I suggest converting the string to lowercase first, as jhpotter92 already suggested.
A typical problem in cases like this is when the order the language deals with operands is not the one you'd expect; if, for example, lua were to evaluate the or before the == operator (which it doesn't, see reference) that code would not work. Therefore it is never a bad idea to write your code like this
if (text == "/teamspeak") or (text = "/ts") then <...> end
just to be sure lua does things in the correct order.
If you ever find yourself in this kind of situation again, and you don't want to wait for someone to respond to your question, you can just start lua in interactive mode (assuming you have lua installed on your system, which is very helpful for everyone who wants to learn/code in lua) and type something like
> text = "/teamspeak"
> if text == "/teamspeak" or text == "/ts" then print "true ♥" end
In this example, the console will output "true ♥". Repeat this with text="/ts" and text="some other string" and see if the line of code behaves as it should.
This shouldn't take you longer than 5 minutes (maybe +5 minutes to install lua first)

Related

Have troubles with ocaml

I have some problems with OCAML I wrote this:
let visibility_graph observation memory =
Graph.add_node memory.graph observation.position
Graph.add_node memory.graph observation.spaseship;
but it's not working. However this is working:
let visibility_graph observation memory =
Graph.add_node memory.graph observation.position
You don't give enough information to give a full answer. However the code you show is completely consistent with your error reports. The first example appears to consist of two expressions (function calls) with no separator between them. To execute two expressions sequentially, you need a semicolon (;) between them.
The semicolon at the end of the first example appears to be misplaced. Things might work (depending on what the rest of your code looks like) if you just move this semicolon to the end of the previous line.
The second example looks like a ligitimate function defintion. Of course it's difficult to tell without knowing the definitions of all the identifiers used.

Can I put an if/unless clause on the next line in Ruby?

In Perl, I often find myself using the following pattern:
croak "incompatible object given: $object"
unless $object->isa('ExampleObject') and $object->can('foo');
I tried to translate this into Ruby like this:
raise ArgumentError, "incompatible object given: #{object.inspect}"
unless object.is_a?(ExampleObject) and object.respond_to?(:foo)
But that does not work because Ruby interprets unless as the start of a new statement. As far as I understand, I can put a backslash at the end of the first line, but that looks ugly and feels wrong. I could also use a regular unless condition raise error end structure, but I like the style of the original form more. Is there a nice (and idiomatic) way to write this as a single statement in Ruby?
Can I put an if/unless clause on the next line in Ruby?
You can't. From page 107 (PDF page 127) of the final draft of ISO Ruby which usually isn't relevant, but basic things like this are and it also spares us from having to read parse.y:
unless-modifier-statement ::
statement [no line-terminator here] unless expression
This is pretty clear. It just doesn't get more similar to your Perl example than:
raise ArgumentError, "incompatible object given: #{object.inspect}" unless
object.is_a?(ExampleObject) and object.respond_to?(:foo)`
or:
raise ArgumentError, "incompatible object given: #{object.inspect}" \
unless object.is_a?(ExampleObject) and object.respond_to?(:foo)
Just as you feel wrong to put a backslash at the end to force a single line statement, it is wrong to use a single line statement when it extends beyond a single line.
This is not really a solution, I was sloppy when reading the question. The OP wants a solution without backslash.
You should be able to do this:
raise ArgumentError, "incompatible object given: #{object.inspect}" \
unless object.is_a?(ExampleObject) and object.respond_to?(:foo)
The \ characters tells ruby to keep reading as if there was no line break.
As far as I know there is no other way than a \, since otherwise, as you already said, Ruby thinks it's a new statement.
Keep in mind that style guides and conventions differ from language to language. In Ruby I'd not expect an if/unless statement in a line coming after it's code. In fact I even dislike putting if/unless at the end of a line, since it reverses the reading direction from If this, then that to that, if this (then what? Ah, I need to read back again), especially when the condition is more complex than raise 'foo' if bar.empty?.
In Perl and other languages though this might be different, since you have other conventions, style guides and this ;-thingy ;)

TCL how to require both operands to determine result in IF statement

new to TCL and running into a short circuit issue it seems. Coming from vbscript, I'm able to perform this properly, but trying to convert to a TCL script I'm having issues with the short circuit side effect and have been trying to find the proper way of doing this.
In the following snippet, I want to execute "do something" only if BOTH sides are true, but because of short circuiting, it will only evaluate the second argument if the first fails to determine the value of the expression.
if {$basehour != 23 && $hours != 0} {
do something
}
Maybe I'm not searching for the right things, but so far I've been unable to find the solution. Any tips would be appreciated.
The && operator always does short-circuiting in Tcl (as it does in C and Java and a number of other languages too). If you want the other version and can guarantee that both sub-expressions yield booleans (e.g., they come from equality tests such as you're doing) then you can use the & operator instead, which does bit-wise AND and will do what you want when working on bools. If you're doing this, it's wise to put parentheses around the sub-expressions for clarity; while everyone remember the precedence of == with respect to &&, the order w.r.t. & is often forgotten. (The parentheses are free in terms of execution cost.)
if {($basehour != 23) & ($hours != 0)} {
do something
}
However, it's usually not necessary to do this. If you're wanting an AND that you're feeding into a boolean test (e.g., the if command's expression) then there's no reason to not short-circuit, as in your original code; if the first clause gives false, the second one won't change what value the overall expression produces.

Julia writing to binary error

I'm trying to write to binary data using from a partitioned data frame. Generally, this process works fine however occasionally I get some errors. I have a written a basic conditional to address the error (I have also used try/catch blocks but I'm working with a relatively large data set and so I think the Boolean might be faster if that assumption is false feel free to make fun of me and/or my friends). Here is some code:
for x in RICT["$i"]["Numbers"]
if typeof(x) == "NAtype"
write(f3, convert(ASCIIString, "$x" ))
else
write(f3, convert(Int32, x ) )
end
end
here is the error which my diminutive understanding of life and Julia tells me I shouldn't be seeing:
no method convert(Type{Int32},NAtype)
Thanks so much.
The output of typeof(x) is not a string so it will never match "NAtype". Remove the quotation marks from around NAtype and then it should work.

better way to do assignment and check result

I have to use String.scan function, which returns empty array if there is no match.
I wanted to assign a variable with the scan function and check it there is a match, but unfortunately I cannot do that because it won't return nil or false on no match.
I wanted to do this (1 line):
if ip = str.scan(/\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}/)
...
#use ip
end
but because it won't return nil on no match I must do:
ip_match = str.scan(/\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}/)
unless ip_match.empty?
#use ip
end
Is there some more elegant way to write this - to be able to do assignment and empty check at the same time or some other way to beautify the code?
Thanks
Since scan returns an array, and even if you are sure there would be only one result, you could do this.
str.scan(/\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}/).each do |ip|
#use ip
end
There's a difference between elegant and cryptic or "concise".
In Perl you'll often see people write something equivalent to:
if (!(ip = str.scan(/\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}/)).empty?)
It's a bit more concise, terse, tight, whatever you want to call it. It also leads to maintenance issues because of the = (equate) vs. what should normally be an equality test. If the code is passed to someone who doesn't understand the logic, they might mistakenly "correct" that, and then break the code.
In Ruby it's idiomatic to not use equate in a conditional test, because of the maintenance issue, and instead use the assignment followed by a test. It's clearer code.
Personally, I prefer to not use unless in that sort of situation. It's an ongoing discussion whether unless helps generate more understandable code; I prefer if (!ip_match.empty?) because it reads more like we'd normally talk -- I seldom start a statement with unless in conversation. Your mileage might vary.
I would preferably do something like this using String helper match
ip_validator = /^\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}$/
# match return nil if no match
if str.match ip_validator
# blah blah blah.....
end
help me keep code dry and clean.
May be this is not the most elegant , looking for others if any :)
Your ip_validator regex seems to be week check this out Rails 3: Validate IP String

Resources