http://icalendar.org/iCalendar-RFC-5545/3-3-6-duration.html - this is the reference to the document. It is somewhat self explanatory, but still a little bit hard to grasp. Maybe someone could explain what does the P in P15DT5H0M20S stand for? Also, maybe there is some other code-character that can be substituted for the P. If so, what are the other characters?
To understand the grammar, you might want to refer to the actual RFC 5545 section. Extract given below:
3.3.6. Duration
Value Name: DURATION
Purpose: This value type is used to identify properties that contain
a duration of time.
Format Definition: This value type is defined by the following
notation:
dur-value = (["+"] / "-") "P" (dur-date / dur-time / dur-week)
dur-date = dur-day [dur-time]
dur-time = "T" (dur-hour / dur-minute / dur-second)
dur-week = 1*DIGIT "W"
dur-hour = 1*DIGIT "H" [dur-minute]
dur-minute = 1*DIGIT "M" [dur-second]
dur-second = 1*DIGIT "S"
dur-day = 1*DIGIT "D"
from the standard, you can see that the letter P is an integral part of the grammar and that no other letter is considered.
P is not subsitutable by anything - look at the grammar, it's the only not optional character, it stands for duration but the D was not available as it is used for days.
Related
Using q’s like function, how can we achieve the following match using a single regex string regstr?
q) ("foo7"; "foo8"; "foo9"; "foo10"; "foo11"; "foo12"; "foo13") like regstr
>>> 0111110b
That is, like regstr matches the foo-strings which end in the numbers 8,9,10,11,12.
Using regstr:"foo[8-12]" confuses the square brackets (how does it interpret this?) since 12 is not a single digit, while regstr:"foo[1[0-2]|[1-9]]" returns a type error, even without the foo-string complication.
As the other comments and answers mentioned, this can't be done using a single regex. Another alternative method is to construct the list of strings that you want to compare against:
q)str:("foo7";"foo8";"foo9";"foo10";"foo11";"foo12";"foo13")
q)match:{x in y,/:string z[0]+til 1+neg(-/)z}
q)match[str;"foo";8 12]
0111110b
If your eventual goal is to filter on the matching entries, you can replace in with inter:
q)match:{x inter y,/:string z[0]+til 1+neg(-/)z}
q)match[str;"foo";8 12]
"foo8"
"foo9"
"foo10"
"foo11"
"foo12"
A variation on Cillian’s method: test the prefix and numbers separately.
q)range:{x+til 1+y-x}.
q)s:"foo",/:string 82,range 7 13 / include "foo82" in tests
q)match:{min(x~/:;in[;string range y]')#'flip count[x]cut'z}
q)match["foo";8 12;] s
00111110b
Note how unary derived functions x~/: and in[;string range y]' are paired by #' to the split strings, then min used to AND the result:
q)flip 3 cut's
"foo" "foo" "foo" "foo" "foo" "foo" "foo" "foo"
"82" ,"7" ,"8" ,"9" "10" "11" "12" "13"
q)("foo"~/:;in[;string range 8 12]')#'flip 3 cut's
11111111b
00111110b
Compositions rock.
As the comments state, regex in kdb+ is extremely limited. If the number of trailing digits is known like in the example above then the following can be used to check multiple patterns
q)str:("foo7"; "foo8"; "foo9"; "foo10"; "foo11"; "foo12"; "foo13"; "foo3x"; "foo123")
q)any str like/:("foo[0-9]";"foo[0-9][0-9]")
111111100b
Checking for a range like 8-12 is not currently possible within kdb+ regex. One possible workaround is to write a function to implement this logic. The function range checks a list of strings start with a passed string and end with a number within the range specified.
range:{
/ checking for strings starting with string y
s:((c:count y)#'x)like y;
/ convert remainder of string to long, check if within range
d:("J"$c _'x)within z;
/ find strings satisfying both conditions
s&d
}
Example use:
q)range[str;"foo";8 12]
011111000b
q)str where range[str;"foo";8 12]
"foo8"
"foo9"
"foo10"
"foo11"
"foo12"
This could be made more efficient by checking the trailing digits only on the subset of strings starting with "foo".
For your example you can pad, fill with a char, and then simple regex works fine:
("."^5$("foo7";"foo8";"foo9";"foo10";"foo11";"foo12";"foo13")) like "foo[1|8-9][.|0-2]"
I want to create a variable with these unit: ((rad/s)/((N/m)^0.5))
I've tried many settings but it still doesn't work.
That's my last try:
Real Cap_fact (quantity = "CapacityFactor", unit = "((rad/s)/((N/m)^0.5))");
I've tried also with:
Real Cap_fact (final unit = ((rad/s)/((N/m)^0.5)));
Square roots are not supported in unit definitions, since you must use integers as exponents.
The Modelica Specifications defines in chapter 19.1 The Syntax of Unit Expressions:
unit_factor:
unit_operand [ unit_exponent ]
unit_exponent:
[ "+" | "-" ] integer
The SI standard uses super-script for the exponentation, and does thus
not define any operator symbol for exponentiation. A unit_factor
consists of a unit_operand possibly suffixed by a possibly signed
integer number, which is interpreted as an exponent.
Note that you also have to remove the character ^ when you define an exponent.
I have few similar questions about expressions. I marked them as Q1, Q2 and Q3 for convenience.
First. As stated in the docs,
Variable names in an expression are not enclosed in percent signs (except for pseudo-arrays and other double references). Consequently, literal strings must be enclosed in double quotes to distinguish them from variables.Source
As I understand, this means we should write code like this:
a = aaa
b = zzz
if (a = "aaa" or b = "bbb")
MsgBox, It works!
However, this seems also works:
a = aaa
b = zzz
if (%a% = aaa or %b% = bbb)
MsgBox, It works!
Is there some drawbacks in the second way? (Q1)
One possible drawback, which I found myself, is that second method will not work if variable contains only digits. This will not work:
a = 111
b = 999
if (%a% = 111 or %b% = 222)
MsgBox, It works!
Why it stopped worked now? (Q2)
And also, if variable contains only digits, there seems no need to quote it's value in expression:
a = 111
if (a = "111") ; Also works for a = "aaa"
MsgBox, It works!
a = 111
if (a = 111) ; It will not work for a = "aaa". We forced to us quote signs if var contains letters.
MsgBox, It works too.
Why second way (if (a = 111)) works and should or should not we avoid it? (Q3).
(Q1)
If a variable is enclosed in percent signs within an expression (in your example %a%), whatever that variable contains is assumed to be the name or partial name of another variable.
This also works
a = aaa
b = zzz
if (%a% = a or %h% = cc)
MsgBox, It works!
because the values of the vars %a% and %h% are not specified.
(Q2)
If both var and value are purely numeric, they will be compared as numbers rather than as strings.
Otherwise, they will be compared alphabetically as strings (that is, alphabetical order will determine whether var is greater, equal, or less than value).
(Q3)
Only literal strings must be enclosed in double quotes.
If the variable contains only digits, there is no need to quote.
Swift seems to be trying to deprecate the notion of a string being composed of an array of atomic characters, which makes sense for many uses, but there's an awful lot of programming that involves picking through datastructures that are ASCII for all practical purposes: particularly with file I/O. The absence of a built in language feature to specify a character literal seems like a gaping hole, i.e. there is no analog of the C/Java/etc-esque:
String foo="a"
char bar='a'
This is rather inconvenient, because even if you convert your strings into arrays of characters, you can't do things like:
let ch:unichar = arrayOfCharacters[n]
if ch >= 'a' && ch <= 'z' {...whatever...}
One rather hacky workaround is to do something like this:
let LOWCASE_A = ("a" as NSString).characterAtIndex(0)
let LOWCASE_Z = ("z" as NSString).characterAtIndex(0)
if ch >= LOWCASE_A && ch <= LOWCASE_Z {...whatever...}
This works, but obviously it's pretty ugly. Does anyone have a better way?
Characters can be created from Strings as long as those Strings are only made up of a single character. And, since Character implements ExtendedGraphemeClusterLiteralConvertible, Swift will do this for you automatically on assignment. So, to create a Character in Swift, you can simply do something like:
let ch: Character = "a"
Then, you can use the contains method of an IntervalType (generated with the Range operators) to check if a character is within the range you're looking for:
if ("a"..."z").contains(ch) {
/* ... whatever ... */
}
Example:
let ch: Character = "m"
if ("a"..."z").contains(ch) {
println("yep")
} else {
println("nope")
}
Outputs:
yep
Update: As #MartinR pointed out, the ordering of Swift characters is based on Unicode Normalization Form D which is not in the same order as ASCII character codes. In your specific case, there are more characters between a and z than in straight ASCII (ä for example). See #MartinR's answer here for more info.
If you need to check if a character is in between two ASCII character codes, then you may need to do something like your original workaround. However, you'll also have to convert ch to an unichar and not a Character for it to work (see this question for more info on Character vs unichar):
let a_code = ("a" as NSString).characterAtIndex(0)
let z_code = ("z" as NSString).characterAtIndex(0)
let ch_code = (String(ch) as NSString).characterAtIndex(0)
if (a_code...z_code).contains(ch_code) {
println("yep")
} else {
println("nope")
}
Or, the even more verbose way without using NSString:
let startCharScalars = "a".unicodeScalars
let startCode = startCharScalars[startCharScalars.startIndex]
let endCharScalars = "z".unicodeScalars
let endCode = endCharScalars[endCharScalars.startIndex]
let chScalars = String(ch).unicodeScalars
let chCode = chScalars[chScalars.startIndex]
if (startCode...endCode).contains(chCode) {
println("yep")
} else {
println("nope")
}
Note: Both of those examples only work if the character only contains a single code point, but, as long as we're limited to ASCII, that shouldn't be a problem.
If you need C-style ASCII literals, you can just do this:
let chr = UInt8(ascii:"A") // == UInt8( 0x41 )
Or if you need 32-bit Unicode literals you can do this:
let unichr1 = UnicodeScalar("A").value // == UInt32( 0x41 )
let unichr2 = UnicodeScalar("é").value // == UInt32( 0xe9 )
let unichr3 = UnicodeScalar("😀").value // == UInt32( 0x1f600 )
Or 16-bit:
let unichr1 = UInt16(UnicodeScalar("A").value) // == UInt16( 0x41 )
let unichr2 = UInt16(UnicodeScalar("é").value) // == UInt16( 0xe9 )
All of these initializers will be evaluated at compile time, so it really is using an immediate literal at the assembly instruction level.
The feature you want was proposed to be in Swift 5.1, but that proposal was rejected for a few reasons:
Ambiguity
The proposal as written, in the current Swift ecosystem, would have allowed for expressions like 'x' + 'y' == "xy", which was not intended (the proper syntax would be "x" + "y" == "xy").
Amalgamation
The proposal was two in one.
First, it proposed a way to introduce single-quote literals into the language.
Second, it proposed that these would be convertible to numerical types to deal with ASCII values and Unicode codepoints.
These are both good proposals, and it was recommended that this be split into two and re-proposed. Those follow-up proposals have not yet been formalized.
Disagreement
It never reached consensus whether the default type of 'x' would be a Character or a Unicode.Scalar. The proposal went with Character, citing the Principle of Least Surprise, despite this lack of consensus.
You can read the full rejection rationale here.
The syntax might/would look like this:
let myChar = 'f' // Type is Character, value is solely the unicode U+0066 LATIN SMALL LETTER F
let myInt8: Int8 = 'f' // Type is Int8, value is 102 (0x66)
let myUInt8Array: [UInt8] = [ 'a', 'b', '1', '2' ] // Type is [UInt8], value is [ 97, 98, 49, 50 ] ([ 0x61, 0x62, 0x31, 0x32 ])
switch someUInt8 {
case 'a' ... 'f': return "Lowercase hex letter"
case 'A' ... 'F': return "Uppercase hex letter"
case '0' ... '9': return "Hex digit"
default: return "Non-hex character"
}
It also looks like you can use the following syntax:
Character("a")
This will create a Character from the specified single character string.
I have only tested this in Swift 4 and Xcode 10.1
Why do I exhume 7 year old posts? Fun I guess? Seriously though, I think I can add to the discussion.
It is not a gaping hole, or rather, it is a deliberate gaping hole that explicitly discourages conflating a string of text with a sequence of ASCII bytes.
You absolutely can pick apart a String. A String implements BidirectionalCollection and has many ways to manipulate the atoms. See: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/swift/string.
But you have to get used to the more generalized notion of a String. It can be picked apart from the User perspective, which is a sequence of grapheme clusters, each (usually) which a visually separable appearance, or from the encoding perspective, which can be one of several (UTF32, UTF16, UTF8).
At the risk of overanalyzing the wording of your question:
A data structure is conceptual, and independent of encoding in storage
A data structure encoded as an ASCII string is just one kind of ASCII string
By design the encoding of ASCII values 0-127 will have an identical encoding in UTF-8, so loading that stream with a UTF8 API is fine
A data structure encoded as a string where fields of the structure have UTF-8 Unicode string values is not an ASCII string, but a UTF-8 string itself
A string is either ASCII-encoded or not; "for practical purposes" isn't a meaningful qualifier. A UTF-8 database field where 99.99% of the text falls in the ASCII range (where encodings will match), but occasionally doesn't, will present some nasty bug opportunities.
Instead of a terse and low-level equivalence of fixed-width integers and English-only text, Swift has a richer API that forces more explicit naming of the involved categories and entities. If you want to deal with ASCII, there's a name (method) for that, and if you want to deal with human sub-categories, there's a name for that, too, and they're totally independent of one another. There is a strong move away from ASCII and the English-centric string handling model of C. This is factual, not evangelizing, and it can present an irksome learning curve.
(This is aimed at new-comers, acknowledging the OP probably has years of experience with this now.)
For what you're trying to do there, consider:
let foo = "abcDeé#¶œŎO!##"
foo.forEach { c in
print((c.isASCII ? "\(c) is ascii with value \(c.asciiValue ?? 0); " : "\(c) is not ascii; ")
+ ((c.isLetter ? "\(c) is a letter" : "\(c) is not a letter")))
}
b is ascii with value 98; b is a letter
c is ascii with value 99; c is a letter
D is ascii with value 68; D is a letter
e is ascii with value 101; e is a letter
é is not ascii; é is a letter
# is ascii with value 64; # is not a letter
¶ is not ascii; ¶ is not a letter
œ is not ascii; œ is a letter
Ŏ is not ascii; Ŏ is a letter
O is ascii with value 79; O is a letter
! is ascii with value 33; ! is not a letter
# is ascii with value 64; # is not a letter
# is ascii with value 35; # is not a letter
I would like to modify a string that will have make the first letter capitalized and all other letters lower cased, and anything else will be unchanged.
I tried this:
function new_string=switchCase(str1)
%str1 represents the given string containing word or phrase
str1Lower=lower(str1);
spaces=str1Lower==' ';
caps1=[true spaces];
%we want the first letter and the letters after space to be capital.
strNew1=str1Lower;
strNew1(caps1)=strNew1(caps1)-32;
end
This function works nicely if there is nothing other than a letter after space. If we have anything else for example:
str1='WOW ! my ~Code~ Works !!'
Then it gives
new_string =
'Wow My ^code~ Works !'
However, it has to give (according to the requirement),
new_string =
'Wow! My ~code~ Works !'
I found a code which has similarity with this problem. However, that is ambiguous. Here I can ask question if I don't understand.
Any help will be appreciated! Thanks.
Interesting question +1.
I think the following should fulfil your requirements. I've written it as an example sub-routine and broken down each step so it is obvious what I'm doing. It should be straightforward to condense it into a function from here.
Note, there is probably also a clever way to do this with a single regular expression, but I'm not very good with regular expressions :-) I doubt a regular expression based solution will run much faster than what I've provided (but am happy to be proven wrong).
%# Your example string
Str1 ='WOW ! my ~Code~ Works !!';
%# Convert case to lower
Str1 = lower(Str1);
%# Convert to ascii
Str1 = double(Str1);
%# Find an index of all locations after spaces
I1 = logical([0, (Str1(1:end-1) == 32)]);
%# Eliminate locations that don't contain lower-case characters
I1 = logical(I1 .* ((Str1 >= 97) & (Str1 <= 122)));
%# Check manually if the first location contains a lower-case character
if Str1(1) >= 97 && Str1(1) <= 122; I1(1) = true; end;
%# Adjust all appropriate characters in ascii form
Str1(I1) = Str1(I1) - 32;
%# Convert result back to a string
Str1 = char(Str1);