I have to sorting algorithm to sort out recipes from one of my machines. Is there a way to push/append values into my array?
There is no standard List or similar implementation in the Beckhoff/TwinCAT libraries.
Best choice would be to make your own.
Make a function block containing an array and public method for appending (and other functionality you want).
Internally in the function block you then keep track of which indices are used and which are free.
Related
Recently, in version R2022b they announced the introduction of dictionaries.
I was under the impression that dictionaries were already available, provided by containers.Map. Are dictionaries just a different name mapped to containers.Map? Or are there other differences? I was unable to find anything comparing them online.
From what I can gather, after reading this blog post and the comments under it, and the documentation (I haven’t yet had a chance to experiment with them, so feel free to correct me if I’m wrong):
dictionary is an actual primitive type, like double, cell or struct. containers.Map is a “custom class”, even if nowadays the code is built-in, the functionality can never be as integrated as for a primitive type. Consequently, dictionary is significantly faster.
dictionary uses normal value semantics. If you make a copy you have two independent dictionaries (note MATLAB’s lazy copy mechanism). containers.Map is a handle class, meaning that all copies point to the same data, modifying one copy modifies them all.
containers.Map can use char arrays (the old string format) or numbers as keys (string is implicitly converted to char when used as key). dictionary can use any type, as long as it overloads keyhash. This means you can use your own custom class objects as keys.
dictionary is vectorized, you can look up multiple values at once. With a containers.Map you can look up multiple values using the values function, not the normal lookup syntax.
dictionary has actual O(1) lookup. If I remember correctly, containers.Map doesn’t.*
containers.Map can store any array as value, dictionary stores only scalars. The scalar can be a cell, which can contain any array, but this leads to awkward semantics, since retrieving the value retrieves the cell, not its contents.
* No, it is also O(1), at least in R2022b.
Is there a way to dynamically create tables in wiki?
Usecase : I'm trying to mimic similar to soap sonar in fitnesse. SOAP SOANR 1. Once we import the wsdl, soap sonar generates inputs for operations in wsdl. 2. Choose a operation, Enter input and then execute the operation. 3. In case of arrays, we can select size of array and enter values in respective array.
Fitnesse 1. I'm able to achieve point 1 using soapui jars. 2. This i'm able to achieve using xmlhttptest fixture
I'm stuck in 3rd point. Is there a way i can do this in fitnesse? (My idea is from point 1, i can get sample input for each operation, from which i will get to know that there are arrays/complex types present in input.xml but how do we represent this in wiki dynamically?
Thanks in advance
What I've done in the past is use ListFixture (and MapFixture) to dynamically fill a List (and Map/Hashes for each element's properties) and then use these as input values to a XmlHttpTest's feature to create the body to be sent using a FreeMarker template (which allows iteration over a list, which I use to create elements in the array based on the list).
But this gets quite complex quickly. Is that level of flexibility truly required? I found that quite often hard coding the number of elements in arrays/lists in the wiki is simpler to do and makes the test far easier to understand/maintain.
I most cases I prefer to create a script (or scenario) with the right number of elements for the test case(s) in with the request in the wiki page. The use of scenarios allows me to test with different values (but the same number of elements). Another element count gets its own script/scenario.
Being able to dynamically change the number of elements is only worthwhile if you need to test for many different counts, otherwise the added complexity of dynamically creating the body is just not worth it.
Short version
I am considering to use BusObjects to implement hard interface control on a (large industrial) application using Simulink and I would like to store the BusObjects (hundrends of them) into a Matlab structure so that the entire application interface specification is well organized. However, it seems that BusObjects cant be contained into structures, nor they can reside on other workspaces other than Matlab Base. Any idea on how to handle this?
Long version
I would like the interfaces specification to be hierarchical and centralized in some way. I mean, I would like to specify the external interface of my application, then the internal interfaces, then the internal interfaces of the internal interfaces and so on. And I would like this information to be stored in one object that resembles the hierarchy. I was thinking in using an structure with BusObjects as elements.
Unfortunately, it seems that, for a bus object to work, it must be declared on the Matlab workspace as an independent variable of class BusObject. It cant be an element of an structure that is a BusObject, or an element of a cell whose elements are BusObjects or an element of a BusObject vector.
Any suggestion on how to handle this? take into account that if you have a model with dozens and dozens of blocks and more than 3 hierarchy levels, then you end up with hundreds of bus objects in the Matlab workspace without any particular structure... I think that is too messy to let it be...
Bus objects are always stored in the global workspace.
Send a request to Mathworks if you want to change this.
This question is about handling arrays of information, there's are many ways I could do this, but I would like some input from programmers with more experience, I know what I want to do just not how to organize the information the best way, and objective-C is really making me ponder this, I don't want to get 100 hours into work a decide, oops this wasted the beast way to do this. So here goes:
I have a grid where I'm simulating a playing field, each piece of the grid I call a cell. The cells have around 20 different values each, all integers, nothing fancy. A change to a cell will be either by player input, or occur or by surrounding cells through different algorithms.
The changes to cells will occur once a turn is complete, so it's not real time. Now, I'm not even sure about doing this with a MutableArrays, a plain Array, or just a plain matrix. Arrays are good at keeping such info for one dimension, but I would imagine would become quite cumbersome if you have to address a batch of 10,000 of these cells. On the other hand a simple matrix might not be so elegant, but probably easier to work with.
Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
You have two options here that I see:
1) Use standard containers
Assuming that the playing field is of constant size, then you can create a mutable array of x*y size, and populate it with mutable dictionaries. By giving everything in the second mutable dictionary keys, you can query and set their properties (all objects of course, so wrap ints in NSNumbers etc). For indexing use a macro INDEX_FROM_ROW_COL(row, col) and apply the appropriate code to multiply/add.
2) Create a helper object subclassed from NSObject. It would manage mutable objects as above, but you could load it with functionality specific to your application. You could provide methods that have parameters of "row:" and "col:". Methods that change or set properties of each cell based on some criteria. Personally, I think this is a better idea as you can incapsulate logic here and make the interface to it more high level. It will make it easier to log whats going on too.
At first I assumed that every collection class would receive an additional par method which would convert the collection to a fitting parallel data structure (like map returns the best collection for the element type in Scala 2.8).
Now it seems that some collection classes support a par method (e. g. Array) but others have toParSeq, toParIterable methods (e. g. List). This is a bit weird, since Array isn't used or recommended that often.
What is the reason for that? Wouldn't it be better to just have a par available on all collection classes doing the "right thing"?
If I have data which might be processed in parallel, what types should I use? The traits in scala.collection or the type of the implementation directly?
Or should I prefer Arrays now, because they seem to be cheaper to parallelize?
Lists aren't that well suited for parallel processing. The reason is that to get to the end of the list, you have to walk through every single element. Thus, you may as well just treat the list as an iterator, and thus may as well just use something more generic like toParIterable.
Any collection that has a fast index is a good candidate for parallel processing. This includes anything implementing LinearSeqOptimized, plus trees and hash tables. Array has as fast of an index as you can get, so it's a fairly natural choice. You can also use things like ArrayBuffer (which has a par method returning a ParArray).