kdb: differences between value and eval - kdb

From KX: https://code.kx.com/q/ref/value/ says, when x is a list, value[x] will be result of evaluating list as a parse tree.
Q1. In code below, I understand (A) is a parse tree, given below definition. However, why does (B) also work? Is ("+";3;4) a valid parse tree?
q)value(+;3;4) / A
7
q)value("+";3;4) / B
7
q)eval(+;3;4) / C
7
q)eval("+";3;4) / D
'length
[0] eval("+";3;4)
Any other parse tree takes a form of a list, of which the first item
is a function and the remaining items are its arguments. Any of these
items can be parse trees. https://code.kx.com/q/basics/parsetrees/
Q2. In below code, value failed to return the result of what I think is a valid parse tree, but eval works fine, recursively evaluating the tree. Does this mean the topmost description is wrong?
q)value(+;3;(+;4;5))
'type
[0] value(+;3;(+;4;5))
^
q)eval(+;3;(+;4;5))
12
Q3. In general then, how do we choose whether to use value or eval?

put simply the difference between eval and value is that eval is specifically designed to evaluate parse trees, whereas value works on parse trees among other operations it does. For example value can be used to see the non-keyed values of dictionaries, or value strings, such as:
q)value"3+4"
7
Putting this string instead into the eval, we simply get the string back:
q)eval"3+4"
"3+4"
1 Following this, the first part of your question isn't too bad to answer. The format ("+";3;4) is not technically the parsed form of 3+4, we can see this through:
q)parse"3+4"
+
3
4
The good thing about value in this case is that it is valuing the string "+" into a the operator + and then valuing executing the parse tree. eval cannot understand the string "+" as this it outside the scope of the function. Which is why A, B and C work but not D.
2 In part two, your parse tree is indeed correct and once again we can see this with the parse function:
q)parse"3+(4+5)"
+
3
(+;4;5)
eval can always be used if your parse tree represents a valid statement to get the result you want. value will not work on all parse tree's only "simple" ones. So the nested list statement you have here cannot be evaluated by value.
3 In general eval is probably the best function of choice for evaluating your parse trees if you know them to be the correct parse tree format, as it can properly evaluate your statements, even if they are nested.

Related

What is (!). in kdb and are below usecases valid to use it?

What is (!). called in kdb?
and are below use cases valid to use (!). to convert a list to a dictionary or are there better ways and other uses of (!). ?
Example:
q)(!). (`A`B;(`C`D`E;`F`G`H));
q).[(!);flip (`A`B;`C`D;`E`F)]
I cannot find any documentation on the use cases on (!). in kdb tutorials. Please share any information on (!). and its uses?
It's a version of apply & yep your use case is valid. The reason the operator is wrapped in parentheses is because it itself is a dyadic infix operator as is dot apply (.)
If you attempt to apply it as is, your expression is like so, which Q doesn't like
// infixOp infixOp operand
q)+ . 4 5
'
[0] + . 4 5
^
Wrapping the operator within parentheses effectively transforms it so the expression now becomes
// operand infixOp operand
q)(+). 4 5
9
If you define a function which can't be used infix, then there's no need to wrap it
q)f:+
q)4 f 5
'type
[0] 4 f 5
^
q)f . 4 5
9
If using apply with bracket notation as in your example, there's no need to wrap the function
q).[+;4 5]
9
https://code.kx.com/q/ref/apply/#apply-index
https://code.kx.com/q/basics/syntax/#parentheses-around-a-function-with-infix-syntax
Jason
In terms of use-cases, I find it very useful when defining dictionaries/tables as configs particularly when dictionaries are too wide (horizontal) for the screen or when it's more useful to see fields/mappings vertically as pairs. From a code/script point of view that is.
For example:
mapping:(!) . flip(
(`one; 1);
(`two; 2);
(`three; 3));
is much easier to read when scanning through a q script than
mapping2:`one`two`three!1 2 3
when the latter gets very wide.
It makes no difference to the actual dictionary of course because as Jason pointed out it's the same thing.

kdb/q question: How do I interpret this groupby in my functional selection?

I am new to kdb/q and am trying to figure out what this particular query means. The code is using functional select, which I am not overly comfortable with.
?[output;();b;a];
where output is some table which has columns size time symbol
the groupby filter dictionary b is defined as follows
key | value
---------------
ts | ("+";00:05:00v;("k){x*y div x:$[16h=abs[#x];"j"$x;x]}";00:05:00v;("%:";`time)))
sym | ("k){x'y}";"{`$(,/)("/" vs string x)}";`symbol)
For the sake of completeness, dictionary a is defined as
volume ("sum";`size)
In effect, the functional select seems to be bucketing the data into 5 minute buckets and doing some parsing in symbol. What baffles me is how to read the groupby dictionary. Especially the k)" part and the entire thing being in quotes. Can someone help me go through this or point me to resources that can help me understand? Any input will be appreciated.
The aggregation part of the function form takes a dictionary, the key being the output key column names and the values being parse tree functions.
A parse tree is an expression that is not immediately evaluated. The first argument as a function and subsequent elements are its arguments. The inner-most brackets are evaluated first and then it moves up the heirarchy, evaluating each one in turn. More detailed information can be found here and in the whitepaper linked on that page
You can use the function parse with a string argument to get the parse tree of a function. For example, the parse tree for 1+2+3 is (+;1;(+;2;3)):
q)parse "1+2+3"
+
1
(+;2;3)
The inner-most bracket (+;2;3) is evaluated first resulting in 5, before the result is propogated up to the outmost parse tree function (+;1;5) giving 6
The groupby part of the clause will evaluate one or more parse tree functions and then will collect together records with the same output from the grouping function.
Making the function a bit clearer to read:
(+;00:05:00v;({x*y div x:$[16h=abs[#x];"j"$x;x]}";00:05:00v;(%:;`time)))
Looking at the inner most bracket (%:;`time), it returns the result of %: applied on the time column. We can see that %: is k for the function ltime
q)ltime
%:
Moving up a level, the next function evaluated is the lambda function {x*y div x:$[16h=abs[#x];"j"$x;x]} with arguments 00:05:00v and the result of our previous evaluated function. The lambda rounds it down the the nearest 5 minute interval
({x*y div x:$[16h=abs[#x];"j"$x;x]};00:05:00v;(%:;`time))
Moving up once more to the whole expression it is equivalent to 00:05:00v + {x*y div x:$[16h=abs[#x];"j"$x;x]};00:05:00v;(%:;`time)), with 00:05:00 being added onto each result from the previous evaluation.
So essentially it first returns the local time of the timestamp, then
For the symbol aggregation
("k""{x'y}";{`$(,/)("/" vs string x)};`symbol)
The inner function {`$(,/)("/" vs string x)} strings a symbol, splits it at "/" character and then joins it back together, effectively removing the slash
The "k" is a function that evaluates the string using the k interpreter.
"k""{x'y}"" returns a function which itself takes a function x and argument y and modifies the function to use the each-both adverb '. This makes it so that the function x is applied on each symbol individually as opposed to the column as a whole.
This could be implemented in q instead of k like so:
({x#'y};{`$(,/)("/" vs string x)};`symbol)
The function {x#'y} takes the function argument {`$(,/)("/" vs string x)} and the symbol column as before, but we have to use # with the each-both adverb in q to apply the function on the arguments.
The aggregation function will then be applied to each group. In your case the function is a simple parse tree, which will return the sum of the size columns in each group, with the output column called volume
a:enlist[`volume]!enlist (sum;`size)

How do I write a perl6 macro to enquote text?

I'm looking to create a macro in P6 which converts its argument to a string.
Here's my macro:
macro tfilter($expr) {
quasi {
my $str = Q ({{{$expr}}});
filter-sub $str;
};
}
And here is how I call it:
my #some = tfilter(age < 50);
However, when I run the program, I obtain the error:
Unable to parse expression in quote words; couldn't find final '>'
How do I fix this?
Your use case, converting some code to a string via a macro, is very reasonable. There isn't an established API for this yet (even in my head), although I have come across and thought about the same use case. It would be nice in cases such as:
assert a ** 2 + b ** 2 == c ** 2;
This assert statement macro could evaluate its expression, and if it fails, it could print it out. Printing it out requires stringifying it. (In fact, in this case, having file-and-line information would be a nice touch also.)
(Edit: 007 is a language laboratory to flesh out macros in Perl 6.)
Right now in 007 if you stringify a Q object (an AST), you get a condensed object representation of the AST itself, not the code it represents:
$ bin/007 -e='say(~quasi { 2 + 2 })'
Q::Infix::Addition {
identifier: Q::Identifier "infix:+",
lhs: Q::Literal::Int 2,
rhs: Q::Literal::Int 2
}
This is potentially more meaningful and immediate than outputting source code. Consider also the fact that it's possible to build ASTs that were never source code in the first place. (And people are expected to do this. And to mix such "synthetic Qtrees" with natural ones from programs.)
So maybe what we're looking at is a property on Q nodes called .source or something. Then we'd be able to do this:
$ bin/007 -e='say((quasi { 2 + 2 }).source)'
2 + 2
(Note: doesn't work yet.)
It's an interesting question what .source ought to output for synthetic Qtrees. Should it throw an exception? Or just output <black box source>? Or do a best-effort attempt to turn itself into stringified source?
Coming back to your original code, this line fascinates me:
my $str = Q ({{{$expr}}});
It's actually a really cogent attempt to express what you want to do (turn an AST into its string representation). But I doubt it'll ever work as-is. In the end, it's still kind of based on a source-code-as-strings kind of thinking à la C. The fundamental issue with it is that the place where you put your {{{$expr}}} (inside of a string quote environment) is not a place where an expression AST is able to go. From an AST node type perspective, it doesn't typecheck because expressions are not a subtype of quote environments.
Hope that helps!
(PS: Taking a step back, I think you're doing yourself a disservice by making filter-sub accept a string argument. What will you do with the string inside of this function? Parse it for information? In that case you'd be better off analyzing the AST, not the string.)
(PPS: Moritz++ on #perl6 points out that there's an unrelated syntax error in age < 50 that needs to be addressed. Perl 6 is picky about things being defined before they are used; macros do not change this equation much. Therefore, the Perl 6 parser is going to assume that age is a function you haven't declared yet. Then it's going to consider the < an opening quote character. Eventually it'll be disappointed that there's no >. Again, macros don't rescue you from needing to declare your variables up-front. (Though see #159 for further discussion.))

How does this Perl one-liner actually work?

So, I happened to notice that last.fm is hiring in my area, and since I've known a few people who worked there, I though of applying.
But I thought I'd better take a look at the current staff first.
Everyone on that page has a cute/clever/dumb strapline, like "Is life not a thousand times too short for us to bore ourselves?". In fact, it was quite amusing, until I got to this:
perl -e'print+pack+q,c*,,map$.+=$_,74,43,-2,1,-84, 65,13,1,5,-12,-3, 13,-82,44,21, 18,1,-70,56, 7,-77,72,-7,2, 8,-6,13,-70,-34'
Which I couldn't resist pasting into my terminal (kind of a stupid thing to do, maybe), but it printed:
Just another Last.fm hacker,
I thought it would be relatively easy to figure out how that Perl one-liner works. But I couldn't really make sense of the documentation, and I don't know Perl, so I wasn't even sure I was reading the relevant documentation.
So I tried modifying the numbers, which got me nowhere. So I decided it was genuinely interesting and worth figuring out.
So, 'how does it work' being a bit vague, my question is mainly,
What are those numbers? Why are there negative numbers and positive numbers, and does the negativity or positivity matter?
What does the combination of operators +=$_ do?
What's pack+q,c*,, doing?
This is a variant on “Just another Perl hacker”, a Perl meme. As JAPHs go, this one is relatively tame.
The first thing you need to do is figure out how to parse the perl program. It lacks parentheses around function calls and uses the + and quote-like operators in interesting ways. The original program is this:
print+pack+q,c*,,map$.+=$_,74,43,-2,1,-84, 65,13,1,5,-12,-3, 13,-82,44,21, 18,1,-70,56, 7,-77,72,-7,2, 8,-6,13,-70,-34
pack is a function, whereas print and map are list operators. Either way, a function or non-nullary operator name immediately followed by a plus sign can't be using + as a binary operator, so both + signs at the beginning are unary operators. This oddity is described in the manual.
If we add parentheses, use the block syntax for map, and add a bit of whitespace, we get:
print(+pack(+q,c*,,
map{$.+=$_} (74,43,-2,1,-84, 65,13,1,5,-12,-3, 13,-82,44,21,
18,1,-70,56, 7,-77,72,-7,2, 8,-6,13,-70,-34)))
The next tricky bit is that q here is the q quote-like operator. It's more commonly written with single quotes:
print(+pack(+'c*',
map{$.+=$_} (74,43,-2,1,-84, 65,13,1,5,-12,-3, 13,-82,44,21,
18,1,-70,56, 7,-77,72,-7,2, 8,-6,13,-70,-34)))
Remember that the unary plus is a no-op (apart from forcing a scalar context), so things should now be looking more familiar. This is a call to the pack function, with a format of c*, meaning “any number of characters, specified by their number in the current character set”. An alternate way to write this is
print(join("", map {chr($.+=$_)} (74, …, -34)))
The map function applies the supplied block to the elements of the argument list in order. For each element, $_ is set to the element value, and the result of the map call is the list of values returned by executing the block on the successive elements. A longer way to write this program would be
#list_accumulator = ();
for $n in (74, …, -34) {
$. += $n;
push #list_accumulator, chr($.)
}
print(join("", #list_accumulator))
The $. variable contains a running total of the numbers. The numbers are chosen so that the running total is the ASCII codes of the characters the author wants to print: 74=J, 74+43=117=u, 74+43-2=115=s, etc. They are negative or positive depending on whether each character is before or after the previous one in ASCII order.
For your next task, explain this JAPH (produced by EyesDrop).
''=~('(?{'.('-)#.)#_*([]#!#/)(#)#-#),#(##+#)'
^'][)#]`}`]()`#.#]#%[`}%[#`#!##%[').',"})')
Don't use any of this in production code.
The basic idea behind this is quite simple. You have an array containing the ASCII values of the characters. To make things a little bit more complicated you don't use absolute values, but relative ones except for the first one. So the idea is to add the specific value to the previous one, for example:
74 -> J
74 + 43 -> u
74 + 42 + (-2 ) -> s
Even though $. is a special variable in Perl it does not mean anything special in this case. It is just used to save the previous value and add the current element:
map($.+=$_, ARRAY)
Basically it means add the current list element ($_) to the variable $.. This will return a new array with the correct ASCII values for the new sentence.
The q function in Perl is used for single quoted, literal strings. E.g. you can use something like
q/Literal $1 String/
q!Another literal String!
q,Third literal string,
This means that pack+q,c*,, is basically pack 'c*', ARRAY. The c* modifier in pack interprets the value as characters. For example, it will use the value and interpret it as a character.
It basically boils down to this:
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
my $prev_value = 0;
my #relative = (74,43,-2,1,-84, 65,13,1,5,-12,-3, 13,-82,44,21, 18,1,-70,56, 7,-77,72,-7,2, 8,-6,13,-70,-34);
my #absolute = map($prev_value += $_, #relative);
print pack("c*", #absolute);

Perl autoincrement of string not working as before

I have some code where I am converting some data elements in a flat file. I save the old:new values to a hash which is written to a file at the end of processing. On subsequence execution, I reload into a hash so I can reuse previously converted values on additional data files. I also save the last conversion value so if I encounter an unconverted value, I can assign it a new converted value and add it to the hash.
I had used this code before (back in Feb) on six files with no issues. I have a variable that is set to ZCKL0 (last character is a zero) which is retrieved from a file holding the last used value. I apply the increment operator
...
$data{$olddata} = ++$dataseed;
...
and the resultant value in $dataseed is 1 instead of ZCKL1. The original starting seed value was ZAAA0.
What am I missing here?
Do you use the $dataseed variable in a numeric context in your code?
From perlop:
If you increment a variable that is
numeric, or that has ever been used in
a numeric context, you get a normal
increment. If, however, the variable
has been used in only string contexts
since it was set, and has a value that
is not the empty string and matches
the pattern /^[a-zA-Z][0-9]\z/ , the
increment is done as a string,
preserving each character within its
range.
As prevously mentioned, ++ on strings is "magic" in that it operates differently based on the content of the string and the context in which the string is used.
To illustrate the problem and assuming:
my $s='ZCL0';
then
print ++$s;
will print:
ZCL1
while
$s+=0; print ++$s;
prints
1
NB: In other popular programming languages, the ++ is legal for numeric values only.
Using non-intuitive, "magic" features of Perl is discouraged as they lead to confusing and possibly unsupportable code.
You can write this almost as succinctly without relying on the magic ++ behavior:
s/(\d+)$/ $1 + 1 /e
The e flag makes it an expression substitution.