Azure DevOps: Version variable type - azure-devops

What is the syntax to perform type casting for variables in Azure DevOps?
This article - https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/devops/pipelines/process/expressions?view=vsts - suggests there's a "Version" type and mentions a function which would interpret it as a string would resolve it in major.minor.build format but how do you infer a variable as a "Version" type in the first place? And how do you pull out the individual aspects (i.e. major, minor, build, etc.) from it?

If you look at the types definition, you can see that the type can be guessed by the notation. For instance, if it's wrapped in '', it is a string. Or, if it starts
with a number and contain two or three period (.) characters
it is of type Version.
Regarding the typecasting, it says that Version.TryParse is used. So, if you read this variable in e.g. PowerShell and try to case to Version type, I would expect it to work.

Related

Apache AGE - Creating Functions With Multiple Parameters

I was looking inside the create_vlabel function and noted that to get the graph_name and label_name it is used graph_name = PG_GETARG_NAME(0) and label_name = PG_GETARG_NAME(1). Since these two variables are also passed as parameters, I was thinking that, if I wanted to add one more parameter to this function, then I would need to use PG_GETARG_NAME(2) to get this parameter and use it in the function's logic. Is my assumption correct or do I need to do more tweaks to do this?
You are correct, but you also need to change the function signature in the "age--1.2.0.sql" file, updating the arguments:
CREATE FUNCTION ag_catalog.create_vlabel(graph_name name, label_name name, type new_argument)
RETURNS void
LANGUAGE c
AS 'MODULE_PATHNAME';
Note that all arguments come as a "Datum" struct, and PG_GETARG_NAME automatically converts it to a "Name" struct. If you need an argument as int32, for example, you should use PG_GETARG_INT32(index_of_the_argument), for strings, PG_GETARG_CSTRING(n), and so on.
Yes, your assumption is correct. If you want to add an additional parameter to the create_vlabel function in PostgreSQL, you can retrieve the value of the third argument using PG_GETARG_NAME(2). Keep in mind that you may need to make additional modifications to the function's logic to handle the new parameter correctly.
The answers given by Fahad Zaheer and Marco Souza are correct, but you can also create a Variadic function, with which you could have n number of arguments but one drawback is that you would have to check the type yourself. You can find more information here. You can also check many Apache Age functions made this way e.g agtype_to_int2.

Is empty string value generally allowed by the FIX protocol?

When I look at the definition of a String type in the FIX protocol (e.g. here or here), I don't see a minimum length specified. Is it allowed to use empty strings? One online decoder seems to accept an empty string value (see tag 320), an other complains that it's invalid.
The FIX 4.4 specification states the following (emphasis in the original text):
Each message is constructed of a stream of <tag>=<value> fields with a
field delimiter between fields in the stream. Tags are of data type
TagNum. All tags must have a value specified. Optional fields without
values should simply not be specified in the FIX message. A Reject
message is the appropriate response to a tag with no value.
That strongly suggests (but does not unambiguously state) to me that the use of an empty value for a string is invalid. It is unsurprising to me that different FIX implementations might treat this edge case in different ways. So, I think the best approach is to avoid using empty values for strings.
+1 for Ciaran's and Grant's answer/comments. Just want to add something.
I generally suggest to look up things like this in the most current specification since they usually have been refined/reworded/clarified to eliminate unclear or ambiguous statements from older specs.
The answer is on the very page you link to in your question (emphasis mine, search for "Well-formed field"): https://www.fixtrading.org/standards/tagvalue-online/#field-syntax
A well-formed field has the form:
tag=value<SOH>
A field shall be considered malformed if any of the following occurs as a result of encoding:
the tag is empty
the tag delimiter is missing
the value is empty
the value contains an <SOH> character and the datatype of the field is not data or XMLdata
the datatype of the field is data and the field is not immediately preceded by its associated Length field.

In PostgreSQL, which types can be cast with the type name first?

Reading the PostgreSQL docs, I see that you can cast a longish bit of text to xml like this:
SELECT xml '<long>long text, may span many lines</long>'
SELECT xml '...'
Curious, I found that I could do the same with JSON:
SELECT json '{"arg1":"val1", <more args spanning many lines>}'
(I couldn't find an official reference for this one. It just works!)
By contrast, this does not work:
SELECT float8 3.14159
I like this alternate syntax from a readability perspective. Now I'm looking for a reference listing which types may be specified up front like this. but I haven't found it yet.
Any pointers?
The documentation says:
A constant of an arbitrary type can be entered using any one of the following notations:
type 'string'
'string'::type
CAST ( 'string' AS type )
The string constant's text is passed to the input conversion routine for the type called type. The result is a constant of the indicated type. The explicit type cast can be omitted if there is no ambiguity as to the type the constant must be (for example, when it is assigned directly to a table column), in which case it is automatically coerced.
The form you are asking about is the first one.
So this can be used for all PostgreSQL types.
Note that the data must be specified as a string literal (in single or dollar quotes) when you use that syntax.

Why is a plus operator required in some Powershell type names?

Why is it that, in Powershell, the System.DayOfWeek enum can be referred to like [System.DayOfWeek], whereas the System.Environment.SpecialFolder enum must be referred to like [System.Environment+SpecialFolder] (note the plus character)?
My guess is because SpecialFolder is part of the static Environment class and DayOfWeek is sitting directly in the System namespace, but I'm having trouble finding any information on this. Normally static members would use the "static member operator", but that doesn't work in this case, nor does anything else I try except the mysterious plus character...
[System.DayOfWeek] # returns enum type
[enum]::GetValues([System.DayOfWeek]) # returns enum values
[enum]::GetValues([System.Environment.SpecialFolder]) # exception: unable to find type
[enum]::GetValues([System.Environment]::SpecialFolder) # exception: value cannot be null
[enum]::GetValues([System.Environment+SpecialFolder]) # returns enum values
System.Environment.SpecialFolder is definitely a type, and in C# both enums work the same way:
Enum.GetValues(typeof(System.Environment.SpecialFolder)) // works fine
Enum.GetValues(typeof(System.DayOfWeek)) // also works
I'd really like to understand why there's a distinction in Powershell and the reasoning behind this behaviour. Does anyone know why this is the case?
System.Environment.SpecialFolder is definitely a type
Type SpecialFolder, which is nested inside type Environment, is located in namespace System:
C# references that type as a full type name as in the quoted passage; that is, it uses . not only to separate the namespace from the containing type's name, but also to separate the latter from its nested type's name.
By contrast, PowerShell uses a .NET reflection method, Type.GetType(), to obtain a reference to the type at runtime:
That method uses a language-agnostic notation to identify types, as specified in documentation topic Specifying fully qualified type names.Tip of the hat to PetSerAl.
In that notation, it is + that is used to separate a nested type from its containing type (not ., as in C#).
That is, a PowerShell type literal ([...]) such as:
[System.Environment+SpecialFolder]
is effectively the same as taking the content between [ and ], System.Environment+SpecialFolder, and passing it as a string argument to Type.GetType, namely (expressed in PowerShell syntax):
[Type]::GetType('System.Environment+SpecialFolder')
Note that PowerShell offers convenient extensions (simplifications) to .NET's language-agnostic type notation, notably the ability to use PowerShell's type accelerators (such as [regex] for [System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex]), the ability to omit the System. prefix from namespaces (e.g. [Collections.Generic.List`1[string]] instead of [System.Collections.Generic.List`1[string]]), and not having to specify the generic arity (e.g. `1) when a list of type argument is passed (e.g. [Collections.Generic.List[string]] instead of [Collections.Generic.List`1[string]] - see this answer) for more information.

Definition of statically typed and dynamically types

Which of these two definitions is correct?
Statically typed - Type matching is checked at compile time (and therefore can only be applied to compiled languages)
Dynamically typed - Type matching is checked at run time, or not at all. (this term can be applied to compiled or interpreted languages)
Statically typed - Types are assigned to variables, so that I would say 'x is of type int'.
Dynamically typed - types are assigned to values (if at all), so that I would say 'x is holding an int'
By this definition, static or dynamic typing is not tied to compiled or interpreted languages.
Which is correct, or is neither one quite right?
Which is correct, or is neither one quite right?
The first pair of definitions are closer but not quite right.
Statically typed - Type matching is checked at compile time (and therefore can only be applied to compiled languages)
This is tricky. I think if a language were interpreted but did type checking before execution began then it would still be statically typed. The OCaml REPL is almost an example of this except it technically compiles (and type checks) source code into its own byte code and then interprets the byte code.
Dynamically typed - Type matching is checked at run time, or not at all.
Rather:
Dynamically typed - Type checking is done at run time.
Untyped - Type checking is not done.
Statically typed - Types are assigned to variables, so that I would say 'x is of type int'.
Dynamically typed - types are assigned to values (if at all), so that I would say 'x is holding an int'
Variables are irrelevant. Although you only see types explicitly in the source code of many statically typed languages at variable and function definitions all of the subexpressions also have static types. For example, "foo" + 3 is usually a static type error because you cannot add a string to an int but there is no variable involved.
One helpful way to look at the word static is this: static properties are those that hold for all possible executions of the program on all possible inputs. Then you can look at any given language or type system and consider which static properties can it verify, for example:
JavaScript: no segfaults/memory errors
Java/C#/F#: if a program compiled and a variable had a type T, then the variable only holds values of this type - in all executions. But, sadly, reference types also admit null as a value - the billion dollar mistake.
ML has no null, making the above guarantee stronger
Haskell can verify statements about side effects, for example a property such as "this program does not print anything on stdout"
Coq also verifies termination - "this program terminates on all inputs"
How much do you want to verify, this depends on taste and the problem at hand. All magic (verification) comes at price.
If you have never ever seen ML before, do give it a try. At least give 5 minutes of attention to Yaron Minsky's talk. It can change your life as a programmer.
The second is a better definition in my eyes, assuming you're not looking for an explanation as to why or how things work.
Better again would be to say that
Static typing gives variables an EXPLICIT type that CANNOT change
Dynamic typing gives variables an IMPLICIT type that CAN change
I like the latter definition. Consider the type checking when casting from a base class to a derived class in object oriented languages like Java or C++ which fits the second definition and not the first. It's a compiled language with (optional) dynamic type checking.