The example in a section about 'list context' in the polars-book uses pl.col("") expression with an empty string "" as the argument.
# the percentage rank expression
rank_pct = pl.col("").rank(reverse=True) / pl.col("").count()
From the context and the output I can guess what pl.col("") expression does. But the API documentation does not seem to cover a case of empty string as the argument to pl.col and I would like to know the precise meaning in this use case. Any helpful answer is greatly appreciated!
The precise meaning is to act as a 'root' Expression to start a chain of Expressions inside a List context, i.e., inside arr.eval(....). I'll need to take a step back to explain...
'Root' Expressions
In general, only certain types of Expressions are allowed to start (or be the 'root' of) an Expression. These 'root' Expressions work with a particular context (select, filter,with_column, etc..) to identify what data is being addressed.
Some examples of root Expressions are polars.col, polars.apply, polars.map, polars.first, polars.last, polars.all, and polars.any. (There are others.)
Once we declare a "root" Expression, we can then chain other, more-generic Expressions to perform work. For example, polars.col("my_col").sum().over('other_col').alias('name').
The List context
A List context is slightly different from most contexts. In a List context, there is no ambiguity as to what data is being addressed. There is only a list of data. As such, polars.col and polars.first were chosen as "root" Expressions to use within a List context.
Normally, a polars.col root Expression contains information such as a string to denote a column name or a wildcard expression to denote multiple columns. However, this is not needed in a List context. There is only one option - the single list itself.
As such, any string provided to polars.col is ignored in a List context. For example, from the code from the Polars Guide, this code also works:
# Notice that I'm referring to columns that do not exist...
rank_pct = pl.col("foo").rank(reverse=True) / pl.col("bar").count()
Since any string provided to a polars.col Expression will be ignored in a List context, a single empty string "" is often supplied, just to prevent unnecessary clutter.
Edit: New polars.element expression
Polars now has a polars.element expression designed for use in list evaluation contexts. Using polars.element is now considered idiomatic for list contexts, as it avoids confusion associated with using col(“”).
Related
Can this be written as a single line?
assertThat(actualDeltas)
.filteredOn(delta -> delta instanceof Replacement)
.asInstanceOf(InstanceOfAssertFactories.list(Replacement.class))
I expected asInstanceOf to do the filtering. Alternatively, I searched for extractors or other concepts, but couldn't find any simple solution.
Is that possible with assertj?
By design, the purpose of asInstanceOf is only to provide type-narrowed assertions for cases where the type of the object under assertion is not visible at compile time.
When you provide InstanceOfAssertFactories.list(Replacement.class) as a parameter for asInstanceOf, you are telling AssertJ that you expect the object under assertion to be a List with elements of type Replacement.
While asInstanceOf will make sure that the object under test is a List, it will neither filter nor enforce that all the list elements are of type Replacement. The Replacement will ensure type-safety with subsequent methods that can be chained, for example with extracting(Function).
Currently, filteredOn(Predicate) or any other filteredOn variant is the right way to take out elements that should not be part of the assertion. If the filtering would happen outside (e.g., via Stream API), no asInstanceOf call would be needed as assertThat() could detect the proper element type based on the input declaration.
In an application I receive a list of strings. Then I want to use OclPs to find all objects where a specific attribute equals any of the strings in the list. E.g. if we have Person objects and receive a list of last names, find all persons whose last name appears in the list.
Although this can surely be done in MDriven's in-memory OCL engine, I can't seem to achieve this in the more limited OclPs (which translates the OCL to SQL and evaluates it as such in the database).
Attempt 1: First assign the list of names to vNames (collection of strings), then:
Person.allInstances->select(p|vNames->exists(n|n = p.LastName))
This gives error "Loop variables can only have class type, not System.String".
Attempt 2: First assign a "|" separated string of the sought names, including leading and trailing "|", to vNames, then:
Person.allInstances->select(p|vNames.SqlLike('%|' + p.LastName + '|%'))
This gives error saying strings cant be added in Firebird. But Firebird does support string concatenation using the || operator.
Trying with .Contains(...) instead of .SqlLike(...) says it's not supported in OclPs. Besides, it would find persons with a last name that is CONTAINED in any of the sought names, i.e. an incorrect search.
I'm out of ideas...
In this case when you have a long list of strings and you want a list of objects I think you best option is to use SQL with sqlpassthroughobjects:
https://wiki.mdriven.net/index.php/OCLOperators_sqlpassthroughobjects
Person.sqlpassthroughobjects('select personid from person where lastname in ('+vNames->collect(n|'\''+n+'\'')->asCommaList+')')
oclPS only implements a quite small subset of OCL because its converting the OCL to sql.
For example, collections of "non-objects" can't be used.
Person.allInstances->select(p|vNames.SqlLike('%|' + p.LastName + '|%'))
Instead, look at sqlpassthroughobjects here
https://wiki.mdriven.net/index.php/OCLOperators_sqlpassthroughobjects
You could also insert the names as objects of a class into the database and then use oclPS.
I suggest that you use a genuine OCL tool. You seem to be demonstrating that MDriven OclPs is not OCL.
In Javascript you can use the spread syntax in a function call like this:
console.log(...[1,2,3]);
Is there an equivalent in Reason? I tried the following:
let bound = (number, lower, upper) => {
max(lower, min(upper, number));
};
let parameters = (1,0,20);
bound(...parameters) |> Js.log;
But this gives an unknown syntax error:
Try reason snippet
There's not. Reason is a statically typed language, and lists are dynamically-sized and homogenous. It would be of very limited use, and not at all obvious how it would deal with too few or too many arguments. If you want to pass a list, you should just accept a list and deal with it appropriately, as a separate function if desired.
You could of course use a tuple instead, which is fixed-size and heterogenous, but I don't see a use-case for that either, since you might as well just call the function directly then.
For JavaScript FFI there is however the bs.splice attribute, which will allow you to apply a variable number of arguments to a js function using an array. But it needs to be called with an array literal, not just any array.
I am looking at CodeMirror help and registerHelper is described as
CodeMirror.registerHelper(type: string, name: string, value: helper)
Registers a helper value with the given name in the given namespace
(type). This is used to define functionality that may be looked up by
mode. ...
http://codemirror.net/doc/manual.html#registerHelper
This does not explain what the value is, when is it called (it seems to be a function), or why getHelpers accepts a position.
Is helper similar to a mode, but providing non-visual annotations (for code lookups)?
It's just a value -- any value. How it will be used depends on the type of helper. For "hint", it'll be a function providing completions at a given point in a document, for "hintWords", it'll be an array of strings that form possible completions, for "wordChars", it is a regular expression describing the characters that count as word characters for a mode, and so on.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 12 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
What are some example use cases for symbol literals in Scala?
What's the purpose of Symbol and why does it deserve some special literal syntax e. g. 'FooSymbol?
Symbols are used where you have a closed set of identifiers that you want to be able to compare quickly. When you have two String instances they are not guaranteed to be interned[1], so to compare them you must often check their contents by comparing lengths and even checking character-by-character whether they are the same. With Symbol instances, comparisons are a simple eq check (i.e. == in Java), so they are constant time (i.e. O(1)) to look up.
This sort of structure tends to be used more in dynamic languages (notably Ruby and Lisp code tends to make a lot of use of symbols) since in statically-typed languages one usually wants to restrict the set of items by type.
Having said that, if you have a key/value store where there are a restricted set of keys, where it is going to be unwieldy to use a static typed object, a Map[Symbol, Data]-style structure might well be good for you.
A note about String interning on Java (and hence Scala): Java Strings are interned in some cases anyway; in particular string literals are automatically interned, and you can call the intern() method on a String instance to return an interned copy. Not all Strings are interned, though, which means that the runtime still has to do the full check unless they are the same instance; interning makes comparing two equal interned strings faster, but does not improve the runtime of comparing different strings. Symbols benefit from being guaranteed to be interned, so in this case a single reference equality check is both sufficient to prove equality or inequality.
[1] Interning is a process whereby when you create an object, you check whether an equal one already exists, and use that one if it does. It means that if you have two objects which are equal, they are precisely the same object (i.e. they are reference equal). The downsides to this are that it can be costly to look up which object you need to be using, and allowing objects to be garbage collected can require complex implementation.
Symbols are interned.
The purpose is that Symbol are more efficient than Strings and Symbols with the same name are refered to the same Symbol object instance.
Have a look at this read about Ruby symbols: http://glu.ttono.us/articles/2005/08/19/understanding-ruby-symbols
You can only get the name of a Symbol:
scala> val aSymbol = 'thisIsASymbol
aSymbol: Symbol = 'thisIsASymbol
scala> assert("thisIsASymbol" == aSymbol.name)
It's not very useful in Scala and thus not widely used. In general, you can use a symbol where you'd like to designate an identifier.
For example, the reflection invocation feature which was planned for 2.8.0 used the syntax obj o 'method(arg1, arg2) where 'o' was a method added to Any and Symbol was added the method apply(Any*) (both with 'pimp my library').
Another example could be if you want to create an easier way to create HTML documents, then instead of using "div" to designate an element you'd write 'div. Then one can imagine adding operators to Symbol to make syntactic sugar for creating elements