I'm trying to follow the IMAP example but I get this error imap: bad sequence set value "" which corresponds with the line set, _ := imap.NewSeqSet("") from the example. Is it a bug in the lib or a typo in the documentation ?
I'm trying to fetch all the messages so setting the sequence to wildcard ( * ) doesn't seem to work either. I've also tried to read RFC with little success. All I could find about the sequence values is this
seq-number = nz-number / "*"
; message sequence number (COPY, FETCH, STORE
; commands) or unique identifier (UID COPY,
; UID FETCH, UID STORE commands).
; * represents the largest number in use. In
; the case of message sequence numbers, it is
; the number of messages in a non-empty mailbox.
; In the case of unique identifiers, it is the
; unique identifier of the last message in the
; mailbox or, if the mailbox is empty, the
; mailbox's current UIDNEXT value.
; The server should respond with a tagged BAD
; response to a command that uses a message
; sequence number greater than the number of
; messages in the selected mailbox. This
; includes "*" if the selected mailbox is empty.
seq-range = seq-number ":" seq-number
; two seq-number values and all values between
; these two regardless of order.
; Example: 2:4 and 4:2 are equivalent and indicate
; values 2, 3, and 4.
; Example: a unique identifier sequence range of
; 3291:* includes the UID of the last message in
; the mailbox, even if that value is less than 3291.
sequence-set = (seq-number / seq-range) *("," sequence-set)
; set of seq-number values, regardless of order.
; Servers MAY coalesce overlaps and/or execute the
; sequence in any order.
; Example: a message sequence number set of
; 2,4:7,9,12:* for a mailbox with 15 messages is
; equivalent to 2,4,5,6,7,9,12,13,14,15
; Example: a message sequence number set of *:4,5:7
; for a mailbox with 10 messages is equivalent to
; 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,5,6,7 and MAY be reordered and
; overlap coalesced to be 4,5,6,7,8,9,10.
status = "STATUS" SP mailbox SP
"(" status-att *(SP status-att) ")"
Here's the code you're copying from.
// Fetch the headers of the 10 most recent messages
set, _ := imap.NewSeqSet("")
if c.Mailbox.Messages >= 10 {
set.AddRange(c.Mailbox.Messages-9, c.Mailbox.Messages)
} else {
set.Add("1:*")
}
cmd, _ = c.Fetch(set, "RFC822.HEADER")
That code sets a variable to "" but never uses that value. It uses another value, which depends on the state of the c.Mailbox object.
The lesson here is that copying a single line from the documentation isn't enough, you need to look at the surroundings.
It seems there is a typo in the Go doc. set, err := imap.NewSeqSet("1:*") fixes the issue.
Related
I'm new in shell programming.
I've to verify if certain sql query returns any tuple/row.
If something`s returned then one action is made, else another action is made. Something like this:
getResults(){
getAnyResults=`sqlplus -s $MMUSER/$MMPASS <<!
set verify off
set heading off
set feedback off
set pages 0
set pause off
set linesize 2500
select x, y, z
from A;
exit;
!`
}
Edit 02/09/2021 - Begin
CREATE TABLE A (
x INTEGER,
y INTEGER,
z INTEGER
);
SELECT * FROM A;
The above code should not return any tuple since i've not inserted anything in table A
However if i do this:
CREATE TABLE A (
x INTEGER,
y INTEGER,
z INTEGER
);
INSERT INTO A
VALUES(1,2,3);
COMMIT;
SELECT * FROM A;
one tuple must be returned(1,2,3)
What i want is to verify if any tuple is returned and if so action1 is made, if any tuple is not returned, action2 is made
Edit 02/09/2021 - End
I'm storing the query's result on getAnyResults variable.
If variable getAnyResults returns any tuple/row one action is made, else another action is made
What's the best way to do it?
If getAnyResults must contain at least a tuple, you can just check this way:
if echo "$getAnyResults" | grep -Eq "\(.+\)"; then
echo ACTION1
else
echo ACTION2
fi
Of course the regexp can be more strict if you need this.
According to the comments, you need to match something like x=1, y=2, z=3 or x=5, y=8, z=4. In this case a suitable test is:
echo "$getAnyResults" | grep -Eq "x=[0-9]+, y=[0-9]+, z=[0-9]+"
I have a list of values that range anywhere from 500-1000. I have a second list of values that denote relevant breakpoints in the 500-1000 range (500, 520, 540, 600, etc). I need to return the highest value in the second list that is less than the value in a given number from the first list. I noticed the "N" functions let you set a conditional on them, so for example if I do:
List.Max(List.FirstN(SomeTable[Breakpoints], each _ < 530))
It correctly returns 520 to me. However if I put this inside an AddColumn function and change the 530 to a local field reference:
Table.AddColumn(MyTable, "MinValue", each List.Max(List.FirstN(SomeTable[Breakpoints], each _ < [SomeNumbers])))
Then I get a "We cannot apply field access to the type Number" error. Is what I'm trying to do possible and I'm just formatting it wrong? I always get confused with scope and references in PQ, so it may just be that.
After each, [SomeNumbers] by itself is short for _[SomeNumbers] (which is what you see when filtering a column). In the List.FirstN call, _ refers to a number in the list instead of a row in a table: the value of _ is tied to the closest each, where closeness is measured by the number of layers of nesting between _ and the appearance of each . Therefore, in your code [SomeNumbers] is trying to find the column SomeNumbers on a number, which doesn't exist.
There are a couple ways to fix this:
You can use a let...in statement to store the current value of the SomeNumbers column to use it for later, like so:
each
let
currentNumber = [SomeNumbers],
result = List.Max(List.FirstN(SomeTable[Breakpoints], each _ < currentNumber))
in
result
You can explicitly define a function with the (x) => ... syntax instead of using each twice, like so:
each List.Max(List.FirstN(SomeTable[Breakpoints], (point) => point < [SomeNumbers]))
I'm trying to find out how to get the last position from a list obtained from
#Unique ( #DbLookup( "" : "NoCache" ; #DbName ; _view ; field1+field2 ; 2 ));
This gives me a list containing , let say , 5 elements. ( I don't know always how much elements there are in it ).
I just to get the last element ( from last position ) ! Thanks in advance.
Actually the answer is in your question's title itself. You can use the #Subset function to do that. So your code would be:
list := #Unique ( #DbLookup( "" : "NoCache" ; #DbName ; _view ; field1+field2 ; 2 ));
lastElement := #Subset(list; -1);
The help documentation says that: If you specify a negative number, #Subset searches the list from right to left, but the result is ordered as from the beginning of the list.
I have more of a 'problem solving' question than a syntax related problem.
Briefly, I'm creating a program that will read a text file full of words (that may feasibly be a list of passwords), one word per line - I'll be using ReadLn for that bit in a loop. For every word it finds, I want it to add "an amount" of obfuscation in line with how users these days will use '3' instead of 'E' in their passwords, or '1' instead of 'I'. I work in the IT security field and password breaking is often part of it and that's what the program is for.
I have managed to create the program so far that it generates a LEET table full of many different values for each letter of the alphabet and stacks them in a StringGrid that I can access as part of the process (and it is also outputted visually to a table).
type
TLetters = 'A'..'Z';
TLeet = array[TLetters] of TStringList;
var
SourceFileName, str : string;
StartIndexFile : TextFile;
i : TLetters;
leet : TLeet;
s : string;
n, o, ColumnSize : integer;
begin
for i in TLetters do
leet[ i ] := TStringList.Create;
// The next sequence of loops populates the string grid by counting the number of characters for each letter of the alphabet and then inserting them down, column by column and row by row...
//Letter A:
s := '4 # /-\ /\ ^ aye ∂ ci λ Z';
ColumnSize := wordcount(s,[' ']);
o := 0;
for n := 0 to ColumnSize do
leet['A'].Add(ExtractWord(n,s,[' ']));
for o := 0 to ColumnSize do
StringGrid1.Cells[1,o] := Leet['A'][o];
// And so on for B - Z
// ... then an OpenDialog that opens the source text file to read. Got that sorted
// A load of file opening stuff and then the obsfucation
repeat
Readln(StartIndexFile, Str);
LblProgress.Caption := ('Parsing Index File...please wait');
OBSFUCATE THE WORDS HERE TO SOME EXTENT
// but now I have hit a barrier....
until(EOF(StartIndexFile));
My problem is this : given the word 'Edward', for example, how do I decide to what level I should obfuscate it? Just the first letter 'E' to be replaced with a '3', and nothing more perhaps? Or the first two letters 'E' and 'd' to be replaced with ALL the values in the LEET table for both of the letters E and d (meaning dozens of new words would be generated from 'Edward', and so on), or all the values for 'E' but nothing else...the list goes on. Potentially, for every word, I could create thousands of additional one's! A 100Gb source file would soon become terabytes!
In other words, I need to set "a level" for which the program will function, that the user can decide. But I'm not sure how to structure that level?
So I'm not sure how to make it work? I didn't really think it through enough before I started. My initial thoughts were "It would be cool to have a program that would take an index of words from a computer, and then generate variations of every word to account for people who obfuscate characters." but having come to code it, I've realised it's a bigger job than I thought and I am now stuck at the section for actually 'LEETing my input file'!
You could use a level (0-10) as input.
0: replace nothing
10: replace all letters with LEET letters.
Depending on the length of the word, you calculate how many letters to replace and just replace random letters in the word, so that you not always replace the first letter for level 1 etc.
I wonder if there is a way to unduplicate records WITHOUT sorting?Sometimes, I want to keep original order and just want to remove duplicated records.
Is it possible?
BTW, below are what I know regarding unduplicating records, which does sorting in the end..
1.
proc sql;
create table yourdata_nodupe as
select distinct *
From abc;
quit;
2.
proc sort data=YOURDATA nodupkey;
by var1 var2 var3 var4 var5;
run;
You could use a hash object to keep track of which values have been seen as you pass through the data set. Only output when you encounter a key that hasn't been observed yet. This outputs in the order the data was observed in the input data set.
Here is an example using the input data set "sashelp.cars". The original data was in alphabetical order by Make so you can see that the output data set "nodupes" maintains that same order.
data nodupes (drop=rc);;
length Make $13.;
declare hash found_keys();
found_keys.definekey('Make');
found_keys.definedone();
do while (not done);
set sashelp.cars end=done;
rc=found_keys.check();
if rc^=0 then do;
rc=found_keys.add();
output;
end;
end;
stop;
run;
proc print data=nodupes;run;
/* Give each record in the original dataset and row number */
data with_id ;
set mydata ;
_id = _n_ ;
run ;
/* Remove dupes */
proc sort data=with_id nodupkey ;
by var1 var2 var3 ;
run ;
/* Sort back into original order */
proc sort data=with_id ;
by _id ;
run ;
I think the short answer is no, there isn't, at least not a way that wouldn't have a much bigger performance hit than a method based on sorting.
There may be specific cases where this is possible (a dataset where all variables are indexed? A relatively small dataset that you could reasonably load into memory and work with there?) but this wouldn't help you with a general method.
Something along the lines of Chris J's solution is probably the best way to get the outcome you're after, but that's not an answer to your actual question.
Depending on the number of variables in your data set, the following might be practical:
data abc_nodup;
set abc;
retain _var1 _var2 _var3 _var4;
if _n_ eq 1 then output;
else do;
if (var1 eq _var1) and (var2 eq _var2) and
(var3 eq _var3) and (var4 eq _var4)
then delete;
else output;
end;
_var1 = var1;
_var2 = var2;
_var3 = var3;
_var4 = var4;
drop _var:;
run;
Please refer to Usage Note 37581: How can I eliminate duplicate observations from a large data set without sorting, http://support.sas.com/kb/37/581.html . Usage Note 37581 shows how PROC SUMMARY can be used to more efficiently remove duplicates without the use of sorting.
The two examples given in the original post are not identical.
distinct in proc sql only removes lines which are fully identical
nodupkey in proc sort removes any line where key variables are identical (even if other variables are not identical). You need the option noduprecs to remove fully identical lines.
If you are only looking for records having common key variables, another solution I could think of would be to create a dataset with only the key variable(s) and find out which one are duplicates and then apply a format on the original data to flag duplicate records. If more than one key variable is present in the dataset, one would need to create a new variable containing the concatenation of all the key variable values - converted to character if needed.
This is the fastest way I can think of. It requires no sorting.
data output_data_name;
set input_data_name (
sortedby = person_id stay
keep =
person_id
stay
... more variables ...);
by person_id stay;
if first.stay > 0 then output;
run;
data output;
set yourdata;
by var notsorted;
if first.var then output;
run;
This will not sort the data but will remove duplicates within each group.