Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.000 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; '(at': 0.03; 'exception': 0.03; 'explicitly': 0.04; 'case.': 0.05; 'mrab': 0.05; 'false,': 0.07; 'closed,': 0.09; 'closed.': 0.09; 'from:addr:ethan': 0.09; 'from:addr:stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'from:name:ethan furman': 0.09; 'message-id:@stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'received:184.172': 0.09; 'received:gator410.hostgator.com': 0.09; 'record.': 0.09; 'skipped.': 0.09; 'skipping': 0.09; 'subject:command': 0.09; '~ethan~': 0.09; 'anyway': 0.11; 'deleted,': 0.16; 'hidden,': 0.16; 'iterating': 0.16; 'latter,': 0.16; 'merely': 0.16; 'record?': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; 'pointer': 0.17; '>>>': 0.18; 'raise': 0.24; 'least': 0.25; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.25; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'setting': 0.26; 'possibly': 0.27; 'wonder': 0.27; "doesn't": 0.28; 'fine': 0.28; 'record': 0.28; '(possibly': 0.29; '>>>>': 0.29; 'no,': 0.29; "i'm": 0.29; 'that.': 0.30; 'file': 0.32; "aren't": 0.33; 'controls': 0.33; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.33; 'version': 0.34; 'options:': 0.35; 'table': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'next': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'does': 0.37; 'option': 0.37; 'ones': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'mean': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'header:Received:5': 0.40; 'think': 0.40; 'received:67.18': 0.65; 'records': 0.68; 'disappear': 0.84; 'furman': 0.84; 'seventh': 0.84; 'ethan': 0.91; 'received:gateway14.websitewelcome.com': 0.91; 'subject:records': 0.91 Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 20:11:48 -0700 From: Ethan Furman User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Foxpro goto command and deleted records References: <5005EDC0.6050608@stoneleaf.us> <5005FCE0.5020204@mrabarnett.plus.com> <50061D2E.8080204@stoneleaf.us> <5006261D.5020609@mrabarnett.plus.com> In-Reply-To: <5006261D.5020609@mrabarnett.plus.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator410.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - python.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - stoneleaf.us X-BWhitelist: no X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: ([192.168.74.2]) [50.137.155.36]:2626 X-Source-Auth: ethan+stoneleaf.us X-Email-Count: 1 X-Source-Cap: dG9idWs7dG9idWs7Z2F0b3I0MTAuaG9zdGdhdG9yLmNvbQ== X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 49 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1342582591 news.xs4all.nl 6912 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:39379 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:25557 MRAB wrote: > On 18/07/2012 03:19, Ethan Furman wrote: >> MRAB wrote: >>> On 17/07/2012 23:57, Ethan Furman wrote: >>>> In Foxpro if you do a >>>> >>>> GOTO 7 >>>> >>>> with deleted off and record 7 is deleted, the record pointer doesn't >>>> move (at least in version 6). >>>> >>>> I don't like that. >>>> >>>> I see four other options: >>>> >>>> 0) don't move the pointer (listed for completeness) >>>> 1) go to that record anyway >>>> 2) go to the next undeleted record >>>> 3) go to the seventh undeleted record (possibly the least practical) >>>> 4) raise an exception >>>> >>>> Any opinions? >>>> >>> What happens when you 'delete' a record? Does it disappear immediately, >>> or is it merely marked for deletion? >> >> Marked for deletion. >> >>> If it is marked for deletion, can it be unmarked? Will a marked record >>> be removed when the file is closed, or does the file need to be >>> explicitly purged/compacted? >> >> Yes, it can be unmarked. No, the table must be explicitly packed. >> >>> If it is merely marked, then I think the best option is 1, or possibly >>> 4 if the file is compacted when closed. >> >> There is a use_deleted setting that controls whether deleted records are >> accessed or skipped. Skipping is fine when looping, not so fine when >> going directly to a particular record. >> > If use_deleted is false, does that mean that deleted records are > hidden, or just that when iterating through the records the deleted > ones aren't yielded? Definitely the latter, but I'm starting to wonder if the former should also be the case. ~Ethan~