I have ANTLR grammar rules to parse expressions like:
1+2*3 = 100 or age+2*3 = 100
My UI is tabular, as following:
age+2
*3 = 100
< 500
The point is the complete expression is split between header and row (eg. age+2*3=100 where age+2 is in header and *3=100 in first row).
I want to persist the partial AST in database so that I can easily show the content of header and row in UI.
With this approach there are two problems:
1) Parsing the incomplete expression in headers (eg. age+2) --> One of the solution for it is to introduce fake variable nodes which can complete the expressions (eg. age+2 = var)
2) How to combine partial ASTs in header and cell for consumption. The major problem here is, due to different priority of operators the final AST might be completely different from original ASTs of header and cell.
Related
In FileMaker Pro, when using number field, the user can choose to use a thousand separator or not. For example, if I have a database with a field for the price of an item, the user can either enter 1,000 or 1000.
I am using my database to generate an XML file that needs to be uploaded. The thing is, that my XML scheme dictates that only a value of 1000 is allowed and not 1,000. Therefore, I want to either automatically remove the comma, or (my preference in this case) alert the user when trying to enter a value with a thousand separator.
What I tried is the following.
For the field, I am setting Validation options. For example:
Require Strict data type: Numeric Only
Validated by calculation: Position ( Self ; ","; 1 ; 1 ) = 0
Validated by calculation: Self = Substitue ( Self, ",", "")
Auto-enter calculation: Filter( Self ; "0123456789." )
Unfortunately, none of these work. As the field is defined as a number (and I want to keep it like this, as I am also performing calculations based on this number), the Position function and the Substitute function apparently ignore the thousand separator!
EDIT:
Note that I am generating my XML by concatenating a string, for example:
"<Products><Product><Name>" & Name & "</Name><Price>" & Price & "</Price></Product></Product>"
The reason is that what I am exporting is dependent on the values in my database. Therefore, I am not using the [File][Export records...] function.
Auto-enter calculation will work, but you need to uncheck the box "Do not replace existing value of field" (which is checked by default).
I'd suggest using the calculation GetAsNumber(self) as the auto-enter calc. If it should only contain integers, wrap that in a call to Int()
I am using my database to generate an XML file that needs to be uploaded. The thing is, that my XML scheme dictates that only a value of 1000 is allowed and not 1,000.
If this is only a problem when you export, why not handle it when exporting?
If you are exporting as XML using XSLT, you can add an instruction to
your stylesheet to remove the comma from all number fields;
Alternatively, you can export from a layout where the field is
formatted to display without the comma and select the Apply current's layout data formatting to exported data option when
exporting.
Added:
Perhaps I should have clarified. I am not using the export function to generate the XML as there is some logic involved in how the XML should be formatted (dependent on the data that I want to export). What I do instead is that I make a string where I combine XML-tags and actual values from the database.
IMHO, you're making a mistake by not taking advantage of the built-in XML/XSLT export option. Any imaginable logic can be implemented this way, without burdening your solution with the fragile task of creating a valid XML.
In any case, if you're using the field in a calculation, you can replace all references to it with:
GetAsNumber (YourField )
to get an unformatted, numeric-only, value.
Your question puzzles me. As far as I know, FileMaker does not store the thousands separator, but rather offers it only as a display option.
That's also why those functions can't find it.
Are you sure you are exporting the raw data and not a "formatted as layout" variant?
Setup a Parameter field with multiple values to be used in a SQL query command and it does not work when more than one value is selected, but works fine with one value selected. And yes, the "Allow multiple values" flag is set to True under Options.
I am trying to go from this:
EMPBNFIT.BENEFITPLAN in ('CONSUMER CHOICE','HMO', 'HS HMO','HS NETWORK CHOICE','HS PPO BASIC NH RPN','HS PPO PLUS NH RPN','MFS CONSUMER CHOICE','NETWORK CHOICE','PPO BASIC NH RPN','PPO PLUS NH RPN','WAIVE MEDICAL')
to this:
WHERE EMPBNFIT.BENEFITPLAN in ('{?MyPlans}')
What a coincidence; had the same problem this morning. I was able to make a workaround in Crystal by converting the array of multiple parameters into a single string, then replacing the IN section with an INSTR comparison.
Make a formula called ParamFix with this logic:
REPLACE(JOIN({?MyPlans}, ","), "&", "; ")
In my case, the different values were separated by an &, but you can replace that based on what comes back from the tables. Then replace the IN comparison with:
INSTR({#ParamFix}, EMPBNFIT.BENEFITPLAN) > 0
I want to filter Chrome DevTool's network panel by the method property and text in the URL. For example, if I am searching for the text chromequestion in the URL and only HTTP GET requests (ignore PUT, POST, DELETE, etc).
I am able to filter by text or by method:
I am not able to combine the filter to search by both text and method:
I read the documentation at https://developers.google.com/web/tools/chrome-devtools/network-performance/reference#filters and I am able to filter by multiple properties (.e.g, domain:*.com method:GET). However, I am unable to filter by text and property (e.g., method:GET chromequestion).
Unfortunately, it's not possible to do this currently. I played around in DevTools originally, but couldn't find a way. I later had a look into how the filtering was implemented, and can confirm there's a limitation preventing you from mixing the pre-defined filters and text filters.
Implementation details
This is a bit long but I thought it might be interesting for some to see how it's implemented. I will probably look into improving the implementation, either myself or I'll log it because it's limited.
There's a _parseFilterQuery function that parses the input field and categorises the entries into two arrays. The first is called filters, and it's the pre-defined filtering options, such as method:GET etc. The second is a text array filter, split up by spaces. The parser determines the difference fairly naively, by checking for the occurrence of :, and - at the start (for negation).
Scenario 1
You only input a pre-defined filter, or multiple filters. For each filter, the specific filter function, which looks at the different properties of the request object, is pushed to a network module filters array (this._filters). Later on, for each request, the function is called on it, and a match returns true, otherwise false. This will determine whether the request is shown. There's obviously a requirement for ALL filters to return true for the row to show.
Scenario 2
This is the interesting one, where you input both a pre-defined filter and a bit of text. This covers the Stack Overflow question. The _parseFilterQuery function looks at the text filters first, before the pre-defined ones. In Scenario 1, this was empty, so it was skipped.
We pass each text word to the _createTextFilter, and push each of the resulting filters to the network module filters array. However, the implementation of this is questionable. The only time the actual word passed in is used is to check whether its a negation filter for a bit of text. If the first character is -, it means the user doesn't want to see a request with the following word in the name. For example -icon means don't show any request with that in the name/page. If there is no negation, it simply returns the WHOLE input text as a regular expression, NOT the word passed in. In my case, it returns /method:GET icon/i.
The pre-defined filters are looked at next. In this case, method:GET is pushed.
Finally, it loops over the requests calling each filter on it. However, since the first filter is /method:GET icon/i, it makes ALL other filters redundant because it will NEVER pass. The text filters only apply to name and path, so method:GET in a text filter will be invalid.
Note: This seems heavily related to Setting feature value to the count of containing annotation in UIMA Ruta. But I cannot quite apply the answer to my situation.
I am analyzing plain text documents where the following structure is assumed:
Document (one, of course)
Section (many)
Heading (one per section)
I am being asked to identify sections by checking whether their headings satisfy conditions. A useful and obvious sort of condition would be: does the heading match a given regular expression? A less-useful but perhaps more achievable condition would be: does the heading contain a given text?
I could and have already achieved this by taking a list of tuples of regular expressions and section titles, and at design time, for each member of the list, as such:
BLOCK(forEach) SECTION{} {
...
HEADING{REGEXP(".*table.*contents.*", true) ->
SETFEATURE("value", "Table of Contents")};
...
}
SECTION{ -> SETFEATURE("value", "Table of Contents")}
<- { HEADING.headingValue == "Table of Contents"; };
This approach is fairly straightforward but has a few big drawbacks:
It heavily violates the DRY principle
Even when writing the rule for just one section to identify, the rule author must copy the section title twice (it should only need to be specified once)
It makes the script needlessly long and unwieldy
It puts a big burden on the rule author, who in an ideal case, would only need to know Regex - not Ruta
So I wanted to refactor to achieve the following goals:
A text file is used to store the regular expressions and corresponding titles, and the rule iterates over these pairs
Features, rather than types, are used to differentiate different sections/headings (i.e. like above, using SECTION.value=="Table of Contents" and not TableOfContentsSection)
After looking over the UIMA Ruta reference to see which options were available to achieve these goals, I settled on the following:
Use a WORDTABLE to store tuples of section title, words to find / regex if possible, lookup type - so for instance, Table of Contents,contents,sectiontitles
Use MARKTABLE to mark an intermediate annotation type LookupMatch whose hint feature contains the section title and whose lookup feature contains the type of lookup we are talking about
For each HEADING, see if a LookupMatch.lookup == "sectiontitle" is inside, and if it is, copy the LookupMatch.hint to the heading's value field.
For each SECTION, see if a HEADING with a value is inside; if so, copy the value to the SECTION.value field.
It was not quite a surprise to find that implementing steps 3 and 4 was not so easy. That's where I am at and why I am asking for help.
// STEP 1
WORDTABLE Structure_Heading_WordTable =
'/uima/resource/structure/Structure_Heading_WordTable.csv';
// STEP 2
Document.docType == "Contract"{
-> MARKTABLE(LookupMatch, // annotation
2, // lookup column #
Structure_Heading_WordTable, // word table to lookup
true, // case-insensitivity
0, // length before case-insensitivity
"", // characters to ignore
0, // matches to ignore
"hint" = 1, "lookup" = 3 // features
)
};
// STEPS 3 AND 4 ... ???
BLOCK(ForEach) LookupMatch.lookup == "sectiontitle"{} {
???
}
HEADING{ -> SETFEATURE("value", ???)} <- {
???
};
Here is my first real stab at it:
HEADING{ -> SETFEATURE("value", lookupMatchHint)} <- {
LookupMatch.lookup == "HeadingWords"{ -> GETFEATURE("hint", lookupMatchHint)};
};
TL; DR
How can I conditionally copy a feature value from one annotation to another? GETFEATURE kind of assumes that you only get 1...
I am using MSXML v3.0 in a VB 6.0 application. The application calculates sum of an attribute of all nodes using for each loop as shown below
Set subNodes = docXML.selectNodes("//Transaction")
For Each subNode In subNodes
total = total + Val(subNode.selectSingleNode("Amount").nodeTypedValue)
Next
This loop is taking too much time, sometime it takes 15-20 minutes for 60 thousand nodes.
I am looking for XPath/DOM solution to eliminate this loop, probably
docXML.selectNodes("//Transaction").Sum("Amount")
or
docXML.selectNodes("Sum(//Transaction/Amount)")
Any suggestion is welcomed to get this sum faster.
// Open the XML.
docNav = new XPathDocument(#"c:\books.xml");
// Create a navigator to query with XPath.
nav = docNav.CreateNavigator();
// Find the sum
// This expression uses standard XPath syntax.
strExpression = "sum(/bookstore/book/price)";
// Use the Evaluate method to return the evaluated expression.
Console.WriteLine("The price sum of the books are {0}", nav.Evaluate(strExpression));
source: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308333
Any solution that uses the XPath // pseudo-operator on an XML document with 60000+ nodes is going to be quite slow, because //x causes a complete traversal of the tree starting at the root of the document.
The solution can be speeded up significantly, if a more exact XPath expression is used, that doesn't include the // pseudo-operator.
If you know the structure of the XML document, always use a specific chain of location steps -- never //.
If you provide a small example, showing the specific structure of the document, then many people will be able to provide a faster solution than any solution that uses //.
For example, if it is known that all Transaction elements can be selected using this XPath expression:
/x/y/Transaction
then the evaluation of
sum(/x/y/Transaction/Amount)
is likely to be significantly faster than Sum(//Transaction/Amount)
Update:
The OP has revealed in a comment that the structure of the XML file is quite simple.
Accordingly, I tried with a 60000 Transaction nodes XML document the following:
/*/*/Amount
With .NET XslCompiledTransform (Yes, I used XSLT as the host for the XPath engine) this took 220ms (milliseconds), that means 0.22 seconds, to produce the sum.
With MSXML3 it takes 334 seconds.
With MSXML6 it takes 76 seconds -- still quite slow.
Conclusion: This is a bug in MSXML3 -- try to upgrade to another XPath engine, such as the one offered by .NET.