I have the following
mydata:raze {[x]
L: select from ....
if[count[L] <= 20; continue]
} peach vals;
and I am trying to add an if-statement that would skip a particular entry in vals if the condition is not met. continueworks well in matlab, but, I am not sure of the corresponding syntax in kdb. Thank you.
You can use an explicit return (:) in the if statement to return an empty list for those cases. Something like:
mydata:raze {[x]
L: select from ....
if[count[L] <= 20; :()]
} peach vals;
Related
I have a table
t: flip `S`V ! ((`$"|A|B|"; `$"|B|C|D|"; `$"|B|"); 1 2 3)
and some dicts
t1: 4 10 15 20 ! 1 2 3 5;
t2: 4 10 15 20 ! 0.5 2 4 5;
Now I need to add a column with values on the the substrings in S and the function below (which is a bit pseudocode because I am stuck here).
f:{[s;v];
if[`A in "|" vs string s; t:t1;];
else if[`B in "|" vs string s; t:t2;];
k: asc key t;
:t k k binr v;
}
problems are that s and v are passed in as full column vectors when I do something like
update l:f[S,V] from t;
How can I make this an operation that works by row?
How can I make this a vectorized function?
Thanks
You will want to use the each-both adverb to apply a function over two columns by row.
In your case:
update l:f'[S;V] from t;
To help with your pseudocode function, you might want to use $, the if-else operator, e.g.
f:{[s;v]
t:$["A"in ls:"|"vs string s;t1;"B"in ls;t2;()!()];
k:asc key t;
:t k k binr v;
};
You've not mentioned a final else clause in your pseudocode but $ expects one hence the empty dictionary at the end.
Also note that in your table the columns S and V have been cast to a symbol. vs expects a string to split so I've had to use the stringoperation - this could be removed if you are able to redefine your original table.
Hope this helps!
I have a problem with If statement in OpenScad.
I have 4 variables
a=20;
b=14;
w=1;
c=16;
I want to check witch number is bigger a or b.
And after depending who is smaller to take the value of smaller variable(in our case b < a) and to make a simple operation with c variable ( c=b-w).
I tried like this but it doesn't work.
a=20;
b=14;
w=1;
c=16;
if(a>b)
{
c=b-w;
}
if (a<b)
{
c=a-w;
}
if (a==b)
{
c=a-w;
}
It seems logic, but in openscad as I understood you can't change the value of variable inside a If statement. What trick can I use in order to get my goal.
Thank you!
in the 3. leg you confused the assignment-operator „=“ with the equal-operator „==“ (correct if (a==b)).
in your 3. leg you do the same as in the 2., so you could handle both as an „else“-leg.
Correct: assignment is not allowed in if-statement. In openscad you can use the ? operator instead:
c = a > b ? b-w : a-w;
After = follows the condition. The statement after the ? becomes the value if the condition is true, and the statement after the : becomes the value if the condition is false. Nested conditions are possible, e.g. your conditions:
c = a > b ? b-w : (a < b ? a-w : a-w);
More information in the documentation.
OpenSCAD's variable assignment is different. You can only assign variables inside a bracket. So c = b - w will only be assigned inside the if bracket. Outside if this bracket it will still be 16. Don't ask me why. You can read more in the Documentation of OpenSCAD.
c = min(c,min(a,b)/2-w);
this also solve the problem )
I am working on a property of a given set of natural numbers and it seems difficult to compute. I build a function 'fun' which takes two inputs, one is the cardinal value and another is the set. If the set is empty then fun should return 0 because fun depends on the product of the set and fun on all subsets of the complement set.
For clarification here is an example:
S is a set given S={1,2,3,4}. The function fun(2,S) is defined as
fun(2,S)=prod({1,2})*[fun(1,{3}) + fun(1,{4}) + fun(2,{3,4})] +
prod({1,3})*[fun(1,{2}) + fun(1,{4}) + fun(2,{2,4})] +
prod({1,4})*[fun(1,{3}) + fun(1,{2}) + fun(2,{2,3})] +
prod({2,3})*[fun(1,{4}) + fun(1,{1}) + fun(2,{1,4})] +
prod({2,4})*[fun(1,{1}) + fun(1,{3}) + fun(2,{3,1})] +
prod({3,4})*[fun(1,{1}) + fun(1,{2}) + fun(2,{1,2})]
prod is defined as the product of all elements in a set, for example
prod({1,2})=2;
prod({3,2})=6
I am trying to compute the function fun using recursive method in MATLAB but it's not working. The base case is the cardinal value should be more than zero that means there should be at least one element in the set other wise prod will be zero and fun will return zero.
Update Pseudo code:
fun(i,S)
if |S|=1 && i!=0
return prod(S)
else if i==0
return 0
else
prod(subset s', s' is a subset of S and |s'|=i)*(sum over fun((for i=1 to m),{S-s'}), m=|S-s'|) //I don't know how to write code for this part and need help.
end if
end fun
prod(s)
n=|s|
temp=1
for i=1 to n
temp *=s(i) //s(1) is the 1st element of s
end for
return temp
end prod
Thanks.
With the pseudo code you added to your question it's nearly impossible to implement the function. Everything is put into one line which is incomplete (at least the outer sum is missing).
1) Formalize your algorithm in a way it can be used to implement. The following pseudo code is probably not correct because I don't exactly know what you want, but it should give an idea how to do it.
fun(i,S)
if i==0
return 0
else if |S|=1
return S
else
r=0
for s1 in subsets of S with size i
f=0
for s2 in subsets of setdiff(S,s') with size <=i
f=f+fun(s2,|s2|)
end
r=r+prod(s1)*f
end for
end if
end fun
2) use arrays [1,2,3,4] instead of cells {1,2,3,4}
3) prod is a built-in function, no need to reimplement it.
I've finally decided to put the sort.data.frame method that's floating around the internet into an R package. It just gets requested too much to be left to an ad hoc method of distribution.
However, it's written with arguments that make it incompatible with the generic sort function:
sort(x,decreasing,...)
sort.data.frame(form,dat)
If I change sort.data.frame to take decreasing as an argument as in sort.data.frame(form,decreasing,dat) and discard decreasing, then it loses its simplicity because you'll always have to specify dat= and can't really use positional arguments. If I add it to the end as in sort.data.frame(form,dat,decreasing), then the order doesn't match with the generic function. If I hope that decreasing gets caught up in the dots `sort.data.frame(form,dat,...), then when using position-based matching I believe the generic function will assign the second position to decreasing and it will get discarded. What's the best way to harmonize these two functions?
The full function is:
# Sort a data frame
sort.data.frame <- function(form,dat){
# Author: Kevin Wright
# http://tolstoy.newcastle.edu.au/R/help/04/09/4300.html
# Some ideas from Andy Liaw
# http://tolstoy.newcastle.edu.au/R/help/04/07/1076.html
# Use + for ascending, - for decending.
# Sorting is left to right in the formula
# Useage is either of the following:
# sort.data.frame(~Block-Variety,Oats)
# sort.data.frame(Oats,~-Variety+Block)
# If dat is the formula, then switch form and dat
if(inherits(dat,"formula")){
f=dat
dat=form
form=f
}
if(form[[1]] != "~") {
stop("Formula must be one-sided.")
}
# Make the formula into character and remove spaces
formc <- as.character(form[2])
formc <- gsub(" ","",formc)
# If the first character is not + or -, add +
if(!is.element(substring(formc,1,1),c("+","-"))) {
formc <- paste("+",formc,sep="")
}
# Extract the variables from the formula
vars <- unlist(strsplit(formc, "[\\+\\-]"))
vars <- vars[vars!=""] # Remove spurious "" terms
# Build a list of arguments to pass to "order" function
calllist <- list()
pos=1 # Position of + or -
for(i in 1:length(vars)){
varsign <- substring(formc,pos,pos)
pos <- pos+1+nchar(vars[i])
if(is.factor(dat[,vars[i]])){
if(varsign=="-")
calllist[[i]] <- -rank(dat[,vars[i]])
else
calllist[[i]] <- rank(dat[,vars[i]])
}
else {
if(varsign=="-")
calllist[[i]] <- -dat[,vars[i]]
else
calllist[[i]] <- dat[,vars[i]]
}
}
dat[do.call("order",calllist),]
}
Example:
library(datasets)
sort.data.frame(~len+dose,ToothGrowth)
Use the arrange function in plyr. It allows you to individually pick which variables should be in ascending and descending order:
arrange(ToothGrowth, len, dose)
arrange(ToothGrowth, desc(len), dose)
arrange(ToothGrowth, len, desc(dose))
arrange(ToothGrowth, desc(len), desc(dose))
It also has an elegant implementation:
arrange <- function (df, ...) {
ord <- eval(substitute(order(...)), df, parent.frame())
unrowname(df[ord, ])
}
And desc is just an ordinary function:
desc <- function (x) -xtfrm(x)
Reading the help for xtfrm is highly recommended if you're writing this sort of function.
There are a few problems there. sort.data.frame needs to have the same arguments as the generic, so at a minimum it needs to be
sort.data.frame(x, decreasing = FALSE, ...) {
....
}
To have dispatch work, the first argument needs to be the object dispatched on. So I would start with:
sort.data.frame(x, decreasing = FALSE, formula = ~ ., ...) {
....
}
where x is your dat, formula is your form, and we provide a default for formula to include everything. (I haven't studied your code in detail to see exactly what form represents.)
Of course, you don't need to specify decreasing in the call, so:
sort(ToothGrowth, formula = ~ len + dose)
would be how to call the function using the above specifications.
Otherwise, if you don't want sort.data.frame to be an S3 generic, call it something else and then you are free to have whatever arguments you want.
I agree with #Gavin that x must come first. I'd put the decreasing parameter after the formula though - since it probably isn't used that much, and hardly ever as a positional argument.
The formula argument would be used much more and therefore should be the second argument. I also strongly agree with #Gavin that it should be called formula, and not form.
sort.data.frame(x, formula = ~ ., decreasing = FALSE, ...) {
...
}
You might want to extend the decreasing argument to allow a logical vector where each TRUE/FALSE value corresponds to one column in the formula:
d <- data.frame(A=1:10, B=10:1)
sort(d, ~ A+B, decreasing=c(A=TRUE, B=FALSE)) # sort by decreasing A, increasing B
I need to code up a query for something like this:
Select [something]
Where
condition in
case
when (if another_condition = A and 3rd Condition = B) then (C,D)
when (if another_condition = N and 3rd Condition = E) then (F,G)
else (J,K)
end
essentially, what I want is if A and B are met, condition could be set to either C or D, if N or E are met, then condition could be set to F or G, else condition set to J or K.
However, when I run this, I kept getting
Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'Case'.
Please help! Thanks!
Maybe this:
Where (Another_Condition = 'A' And Third_Condition = 'B' And Condition in ('C','D'))
Or
(Another_Condition = 'N' and Third_Condition = 'E' And Condition in ('F','G'))
Or
Condition In ('J','K')
Be very careful about mixing and's and or's in a where clause. Parenthesis are important.
How about this - the UNION subquery will give you the full result set within the subquery. Then you can say 'WHERE condition IN ' (subquery). Like this:
SELECT [something]
WHERE
condition IN
(SELECT CASE WHEN (another_condition = A AND 3rd Condition = B) THEN C
WHEN (another_condition = N AND 3rd Condition = E) THEN F
ELSE J
END AS Value
UNION
SELECT CASE WHEN (another_condition = A AND 3rd Condition = B) THEN D
WHEN (another_condition = N AND 3rd Condition = E) THEN G
ELSE K
END AS Value
)
I'd probably go with G Mastro's approach of expanding the query as a Boolean expression. While the nested query approach will work, the intent of the code is less obvious IMO.
Having said that, if there are a lot of cases in your CASE statement, you may want to consider reshaping your data, because no matter how you write the query, it boils down to a big Boolean expression.