Can data be saved between calls to the openCPU server? - persistence

I understand that the interface to OpenCPU is RESTful. Nevertheless, I would like to save data between function calls, if possible.
I naively created the following package:
vals <- c()
fnInit <- function() {
vals <<- c('a','b','c')
}
but I got the error: cannot change value of locked binding for 'vals' when I called the fnInit function. I understand why this is happening.
I then tried:
fnBoth <- local({
vals <- c('a','b','c')
function(which) {
if (which == 0) {
vals
} else if (which == 1) {
vals <<- c(vals,'d')
vals
}
}
})
but every time I POST to the fnBoth function with which = 1, I get the same response:
[1] "a" "b" "c" "d"
If I call the function again, I get the same answer. So, it would seem that the value vals is being reset each time.
My question is: Can data be saved between function calls? The above attempts are not meant to be exhaustive - maybe there's another technique? Or, should I simply save the value to disk?
Thanks

It is not completely clear to me what you are trying to accomplish, perhaps you can elaborate a bit on the type of application you wish to build.
OpenCPU supports chaining of function calls to calculate e.g. f(g(x), h(y)). This is done by passing the session ID of a completed call as an argument to a subsequent one. Have a look at the docs about argument formats: https://public.opencpu.org/api.html#api-arguments. It includes an example that illustrates this by calculating summary(read.csv("mydata.csv")):
#upload local file mydata.csv
curl https://public.opencpu.org/ocpu/library/utils/R/read.csv -F "file=#mydata.csv"
#replace session id with returned one above
curl https://public.opencpu.org/ocpu/tmp/x067b4172/R/.val/print
curl https://public.opencpu.org/ocpu/library/base/R/summary -d 'object=x067b4172'
The first request calls the read.csv function which returns a dataframe. In the last line, we call the summary function where we set the object argument equal to the output of the previous call (i.e. the data frame) by passing the session ID.

Related

AnyLogic inject agents from existing population with characteristics

I created a population with objects from a database with individual characteristics.
I am trying that the objects with a specific value are injected into a source for process-modelling.
("ankunftszeit" means "arrival time")
for (mp_lkw l : pop_mp_lkw){
if (l.ankunftszeit == getTime()){
source_mp_lkw.inject(mp_lkw l, 1, false, false);
}
}
But somehow an Error occurs and I cannot find any solution...
It says taht the inject() only accepts integers
The method inject(int) in the type Source<mp_lkw> is not applicable for the arguments (mp_lkw, int, boolean, boolean)
Syntax error on token "l", delete this token
Where is my mistake and how can it be corrected?
Not sure I understand your issue, but if the agents already exist, you shouldn't use a source, instead use an enter block, and then change your code to (even though this code seems like a terrible idea... instead you should use dynamic events but I'm not sure your purpose)
for (mp_lkw l : pop_mp_lkw){
if (l.ankunftszeit == getTime()){
enter.take(l);
}
}

dart gRPC: what the meaning of the function?

I'm new in flutter(dart) gRPC. I'm learing the tutorial given by https://grpc.io/docs/languages/dart/basics/. But I got confused about the dart syntax in this function.
Future<Feature> getFeature(grpc.ServiceCall call, Point request) async {
return featuresDb.firstWhere((f) => f.location == request,
orElse: () => Feature()..location = request);
}
Actually, I don't understand what argument f means and why there is an orElse. I have found => means arrow function and it can be simply understood as return sentence, but I can't say I figure it out toally. Any explanation would be appreciated.
firstWhere method takes a Predicate. A Predicate is just a function that takes in an object, and returns true or false. So basically it's saying "give me the first object from this list where the function I'm giving you returns true. The orElse is an optional, named parameter that says, if you've gotten to the end of the list and not a single object returned true when passed through the function I just supplied, then execute this function as a last resort and return whatever value it produces. You can think of a Predicate like a filter. It takes an object and returns true if it should pass through the filter, or false if it should not pass through the filter. firstWhere basically goes through each element checking to see if it passes through the filter, and the first time something does, it returns that element. If nothing makes it through the filter, it uses the orElse producer function to generate some value to return, since nothing made it through on it's own.
(f) => f.location == request is a function that returns true or false based on it's argument - it's a Predicate
() => Feature()..location = request is a Producer. A function that has no argument, but produces a value. In this case, a value that is equal to a new Feature with a location value equal to request. An assignment evaluates to the value that was assigned. The cascade .. ensures that the Feature will be returned, instead of the Point object, request.
So basically you can think of it like this:
list.giveMeTheFirstObjectWhere(thisFunctionReturnsTrue, orElse: giveMeTheValueThisFunctionProvidesIfNoneOfTheElementsReturnedTrueUsingTheOtherFunction)
So the purpose of this code seems to be, checking if a Feature already exists, and if it does, it returns the first such Feature. If it doesn't exist, it creates a new Feature and returns it (however, this newly created one isn't automatically added to the list/db)

When does Chapel pass by reference and when by constant?

I am looking for examples of Chapel passing by reference. This example works but it seems like bad form since I am "returning" the input. Does this waste memory? Is there an explicit way to operate on a class?
class PowerPuffGirl {
var secretIngredients: [1..0] string;
}
var bubbles = new PowerPuffGirl();
bubbles.secretIngredients.push_back("sugar");
bubbles.secretIngredients.push_back("spice");
bubbles.secretIngredients.push_back("everything nice");
writeln(bubbles.secretIngredients);
proc kickAss(b: PowerPuffGirl) {
b.secretIngredients.push_back("Chemical X");
return b;
}
bubbles = kickAss(bubbles);
writeln(bubbles.secretIngredients);
And it produces the output
sugar spice everything nice
sugar spice everything nice Chemical X
What is the most efficient way to use a function to modify Bubbles?
Whether Chapel passes an argument by reference or not can be controlled by the argument intent. For example, integers normally pass by value but we can pass one by reference:
proc increment(ref x:int) { // 'ref' here is an argument intent
x += 1;
}
var x:int = 5;
increment(x);
writeln(x); // outputs 6
The way that a type passes when you don't specify an argument is known as the default intent. Chapel passes records, domains, and arrays by reference by default; but of these only arrays are modifiable inside the function. ( Records and domains pass by const ref - meaning they are passed by reference but that the function they are passed to cannot modify them. Arrays pass by ref or const ref depending upon what the function does with them - see array default intent ).
Now, to your question specifically, class instances pass by "value" by default, but Chapel considers the "value" of a class instance to be a pointer. That means that instead of allowing a field (say) to be mutated, passing a class instance by ref just means that it could be replaced with a different class instance. There isn't currently a way to say that a class instance's fields should not be modifiable in the function (other than making them to be explicitly immutable data types).
Given all of that, I don't see any inefficiencies with the code sample you provided in the question. In particular, here:
proc kickAss(b: PowerPuffGirl) {
b.secretIngredients.push_back("Chemical X");
return b;
}
the argument accepting b will receive a copy of the pointer to the instance and the return b will return a copy of that pointer. The contents of the instance (in particular the secretIngredients array) will remain stored where it was and won't be copied in the process.
One more thing:
This example works but it seems like bad form since I am "returning" the input.
As I said, this isn't really a problem for class instances or integers. What about an array?
proc identity(A) {
return A;
}
var A:[1..100] int;
writeln(identity(A));
In this example, the return A in identity() actually does cause a copy of the array to be made. That copy wasn't created when passing the array in to identity(), since the array was passed by with a const ref intent. But, since the function returns something "by value" that was a reference, it's necessary to copy it as part of returning. See also arrays return by value by default in the language evolution document.
In any case, if one wants to return an array by reference, it's possible to do so with the ref or const ref return intent, e.g.:
proc refIdentity(ref arg) ref {
return arg;
}
var B:[1..10] int;
writeln(refIdentity(B));
Now there is no copy of the array and everything is just referring to the same B.
Note though that it's currently possible to write programs that return a reference to a variable that no longer exists. The compiler includes some checking in that area but it's not complete. Hopefully improvements in that area are coming soon.

Can't Access Destructuring Assignment from Complex Object

Given the input value:
input =
name:'Foo'
id:'d4cbd9ed-fabc-11e6-83e6-307bd8cc75e3'
ref:5
addtData:'d4cbd9ed-fabc-11e6-83e6-307bd8cc75e3'
data:'bar'
When I try to destructure the input via a function like this:
simplify: (input)->
{ name, ref, id } = input
...the return value is still the full input or a copy of the input.
Am I missing something simple here? How can I access the destructured value. If you can't access the value via a return, it seems that destructuring has little value outside of locally scoped values.
While this isn't necessarily an advantage, the only way I was able to transpile and get the correct answer was to assign the destructure values to the local scope using # (aka this).
input =
name:'foo'
data:'bar'
id: 12314
key:'children'
ref:1
f = (input)->
{ #name, #id } = input
r = {}
f.call(r, input)
console.log r # Object {name: "foo", id: 12314}
working example - link
If someone has a better way to approach this, please add an answer so I can select it as this doesn't seem like the best way.

FakeItEasy expectation fail against HashSet comparisons

I am using Xamarin Studio 5.2 on Mac OS X 10.9.4 with NUnit 2.6.3 and FakeItEasy 1.23.0.
When I run tests for this code:
using System;
using ValueSet = System.Collections.Generic.HashSet<uint>;
using NUnit.Framework;
using FakeItEasy;
namespace SetTest
{
[TestFixture]
class TestFixture
{
[Test]
public void CallsUsersWithSetAndReducedSet()
{
var values = new ValueSet { 1, 2, 3 };
var setUser = A.Fake<SetUser>();
ClassUnderTest testInstance = new ClassUnderTest();
using (var scope = Fake.CreateScope())
{
testInstance.RunWith(setUser);
using (scope.OrderedAssertions())
{
A.CallTo(() => setUser.Use(A<ValueSet>.That.IsEqualTo(values))).MustHaveHappened(Repeated.Exactly.Once);
A.CallTo(() => setUser.Use(A<ValueSet>.That.Matches(set =>
set.Count == 2 && set.Contains(1)))).MustHaveHappened(Repeated.Exactly.Once);
}
}
}
}
public class SetUser
{
public virtual void Use(ValueSet set)
{
}
}
class ClassUnderTest
{
public static void Main(string[] arguments)
{
}
public void RunWith(SetUser setUser)
{
var values = new ValueSet { 1, 2, 3 };
setUser.Use(values);
values.Remove(3);
setUser.Use(values);
}
}
}
I get the following error output:
FakeItEasy.ExpectationException: Assertion failed for the following call: SetTest.SetUser.Use(1[System.UInt32]>) Expected to find it exactly once but found it #0 times among the calls:
1. SetTest.SetUser.Use(set: System.Collection.Generic.HashSet1[System.UInt32]) repeated 2 times
I don't understand what is causing this failure and how to fix it.
What is needed to get this type of test to pass?
#Tim Long is on the right track in his comment.
Here's a little more detail, as well as updates to respond to your comments of 2014-08-11 03:25:56:
The first reason the first MustHaveHappened fails:
According to the FakeItEasy argument constraints documentation, That.IsEqualTo tests for "object equality using object.Equals". That's what's causing the unexpected behaviour.
Not passing values into the method isn't necessarily a problem, or wouldn't be if ValueSet.Equals performed a value comparison, but ValueSet is a HashSet<uint>, so you can see from that class's method documentation that it doesn't—it uses object.Equals, which tests for reference equality. Thus, your IsEqualTo assertion fails. If you use a more sophisticated matcher that performed a value-type comparison for HashSet, perhaps something closer to what you use in your second A.CallTo, or maybe something using That.Contains, I think you'll have better success.
You may think to use That.IsSameSequenceAs, but be careful if doing so: the HashSet doesn't guarantee the order of the elements in the enumeration, so even if the set has the same elements, you may get a failure.
The second reason the first MustHaveHappened fails:
RunWith changes the contents of the values set between calls to setUser.Use. So the same set is used in two calls, first with 3 elements, then when it has only 2 elements. This means that by the time the first MustHaveHappened call is made, the set has only 2 elements, so the comparison fails. You could see this more clearly by writing an argument formatter for the ValueSet. That would provide more information.
The cause of the mismatch is that when a call is made to a faked method, FakeItEasy captures the arguments. However, for reference types, such as ValueSet (HashSet), only the reference to the argument is kept. Thus, if the object is modified later, in particular between the execution and the verification stages of the test, the object will look different than it did at the time of the faked call. See #jimmy_keen's answer to MustHaveHappened fails when called twice on the same object. There's a little more discussion over at FakeItEasy Issue 306 - Verifying multiple method calls with reference parameters.
In this case, the usual approach is to do as he suggests—provide code to capture the important state of the incoming argument at call time, and then query that saved state later.
You might be able to use something like this:
[Test]
public void CallsUsersWithSetAndReducedSet()
{
var capturedValueSets = new List<List<uint>>();
var setUser = A.Fake<SetUser>();
A.CallTo(() => setUser.Use(A<ValueSet>._)) // matches any call to setUser.Use
.Invokes((ValueSet theSet) => capturedValueSets.Add(theSet.ToList()));
ClassUnderTest testInstance = new ClassUnderTest();
testInstance.RunWith(setUser);
Assert.That(capturedValueSets, Has.Count.EqualTo(2),
"not enough calls to setUser.Use");
Assert.That(capturedValueSets[0], Is.EquivalentTo(new uint[] {1, 2, 3}),
"bad set passed to first call to setUser.Use");
Assert.That(capturedValueSets[1], Has.Count.EqualTo(2) & Has.Member(1),
"bad set passed to second call to setUser.Use");
}
You can see that each time Use is called, we add the contents of the ValueSet argument to capturedValueSets. Then at the end we
make sure 2 calls were made, by checking the length of capturedValueSets
make sure that the first time Use was called, the set had the elements 1, 2, and 3. Is.EquivalentTo checks the two lists but ignores order
make sure that the second time Use was called, the set had 2 elements, one of which was 1
By checking the two captured value sets in turn, all the bits about the scopes and ordered assertions became unnecessary.