Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #352222

Re: A maybe interesting code challenge

From DFS <nospam@dfs.com>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject Re: A maybe interesting code challenge
Date 2016-04-27 13:38 -0400
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <nfqt8e$1dq$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <sandman-80f983cedf5b1ba801ffd374a529b082@individual.net> <nfo5ht$buu$1@dont-email.me> <sandman-12d16528a1215c44f80acc4fd8e897c9@individual.net> <nfon0i$jik$1@dont-email.me> <sandman-ebbc47e852d0466e10672f028475c38e@individual.net>

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/27/2016 1:50 AM, Sandman wrote:
> In article <nfon0i$jik$1@dont-email.me>, DFS wrote:
>
>>> Sandman:
>>> I described it though. IT disregarded the qualifiers and just gave
>>> a scalar containing all the parts of no knowledge of what part is
>>> a field and what part is a value.
>>
>> You/anyone can NEVER know that. The user could input everything in
>> reverse or jumbled. Which is why I had to write other bloated code
>> to make sure they enter only valid field names
>> (name,street,city,state,zip)
>
> This is incorrect. By using qualifiers, the user states the placement of the
> fields, separated by a qualifier.

You are incorrect.  The presence of an operator (it's not a qualifier) 
doesn't state the placement of the field.



>>> Sandman:
>>> It's the path of least resistance made by someone not very
>>> knowledgeable about programming.
>>
>> ha! I disagree, but I can and will use that against the asshole
>> Fabian Russell.
>
> Whatever, you write basic, so... :)

Lucky me.



> He's a moron either way.

He doesn't seem to think so.  He claims to be some kind of genius 
research scientist in the field of image processing.



>>>>> Sandman:
>>>>> Which of course is of no need, since you split it up
>>>>> in two parts, not one. That way you get one split for the
>>>>> semicolons and one for the qualifiers. It's better to set up
>>>>> what they keys and values are.
>>>>
>>>> DFS:
>>>> Maybe.
>>>
>>> Sandman:
>>> Not maybe, definitely. This is what I do for a living.
>>
>> You parse command line input for a living?
>
> I parse, interprete, structure, process and handle data for a living, yes.


After talking with you for just a little, and observing your smug 
attitude, I can see you 'interpreting' data as you see fit.



>> Hope not, but if so that doesn't mean you're right that the proper
>> methodology is to always store key-value pairs.
>
> It is.

... definitely not.



>>>> DFS:
>>>> heh! I think that's 3 responses now that used similar wording. I
>>>> think it's not a coincidence that all 3 failed to declare and
>>>> assign the variables, even though that was part of the primary
>>>> requirement, as stated in the 1st sentence of the 1st post in
>>>> this thread.
>>>
>>> Sandman:
>>> Yes, but parsing the data is the entire point. When you have
>>> parsed the data, how you manage that data in memory is exactly
>>> just details. It's the process of parsing the data into manageable
>>> units that's the trick. I.e. if you read the data into an array,
>>> or two arrays, moving that data to discrete variables is as easy
>>> as:
>>
>>> $field1 = $array["field"][1];
>>
>> That's exactly what my original code does.  That's exactly what
>> everybody else has done, too.
>
>> Do you think you're telling everyone something new? Do you think
>> you're the only one who can do that?
>
> What is wrong with you?

You have a cranky, know-it-all attitude.  Very offputting.


> I *specifically* stated that I *skipped* any such
> step because A. it's a moronic way to handle data and B. *everyone* knows
> this is possible in *any* programming language and as such is not needed as a
> part to showcase how the task should be done. It's a mere nitpick on your
> part when you realized that 2 lines of PHP code parsed input data elegantly
> and easily what took basic some 20+ lines to do

Incorrect.

Your 2 lines did NOT do what my 20 lines did.  You failed the challenge, 
then mumbled about "it's just details" because you don't agree with 
moving the data into those variables.



I futzed with my code, and got the parsing logic down to 8 lines.  I 
could get it down to 5 but it becomes hard to follow.

Dim i,tmpArr,srArr,spl,fld1,val1,fld2,val2,fld3,val3		
tmpArr = Split(srLine, ";")
ReDim srArr(UBound(tmpArr),1)
For i = 0 to UBound(tmpArr)
   spl = Split(tmpArr(i), spChar(tmpArr(i)))
   srArr(i,0) = Trim(spl(0))
   srArr(i,1) = Trim(spl(1))
Next 	


Plus a 2-line function to handle the =/like operator:
Function spChar(lineToSplit)
   spChar = "="
   If InStr(lineToSplit,"like") > 0 Then spChar = "like"
End Function


Plus 6 lines for the variable assignments:
  fld1 = srArr(0,0)
  val1 = srArr(0,1)
  If UBound(srArr) >= 1 Then fld2 = srArr(1,0)
  If UBound(srArr) >= 1 Then val2 = srArr(1,1)
  If UBound(srArr) >= 2 Then fld3 = srArr(2,0)
  If UBound(srArr) >= 2 Then val3 = srArr(2,1)


So 16 lines total.



>>> Sandman:
>>> For instance. It's getting the data into whatever format you
>>> prefer that's the trick. Maybe moving data to a variable is super
>>> tricky in basic, but in every other scripting language, is so easy
>>> that it's not deserving of a separate step in the program.
>>> Everyone knows it can be done.
>>
>> Bad excuse.
>
> *rolleye*
>
>>> Sandman:
>>> Which means you keep your entire search blob in memory, why oh why
>>> aren't you querying a database?
>>
>> So I can send anyone in the [Windows] world a VBScript .vbs file and
>> a list of addresses and they can go to town. No db wanted or needed.
>
> "a list of addresses" *should* be a database. Use a sqlite3 file if you want
> to and then query it using sqlite3, instead of a plain text file.

Why would I EVER force every user to install SQLite and an ODBC driver 
(or a SQLite COM object, or whatever other option) on Windows when I can 
just give them a .vbs script file?



>>>> DFS:
>>>> How would you do that (compare the contents of 2 dictionary
>>>> objects) in php or perl?
>>>
>>> Sandman:
>>> Similarly, possibly. Only, I would never keep the searchable data
>>> in memory, I'd keep it in a database and use my parsed data to
>>> form a sql query. Properly indexed, querying that database will be
>>> super fast.
>>
>> It's fast enough in code - <0.50 seconds to import 10K addresses,
>> de-dupe them, apply the search criteria, sort the output and save to
>> a file. It happens almost instantaneously onscreen.
>
> That's very slow indeed. Maybe I'm just used to building solutions where tens
> of thousands of people are using it at the same time, at which point those
> slow executions add up.

Half-a-second is great response time.


>>> Sandman:
>>> So why was one "like" and the others "=" if the difference isn't
>>> important? Why didn't you use "=" in all your examples?
>>
>> It wasn't important to /this challenge/.
>
> If it wasn't important, then don't include it. Luckily, my code took it into
> account and made the best of it while yours ignored it.

I didn't include it.  I never said a word about the operators.  Only you 
made a big deal out of it.



>>>> DFS:
>>>> No db or SQL in this program - code only.
>>>
>>> Sandman:
>>> So yeah, there's your first problem.
>>
>> If you're relying on a db as a crutch to overcome deficiencies in
>> your skills or language tools, it's YOUR problem.
>
> What. The. Fuck?
>
> A DB has fuck all to do with neither skill nor tools and everything to do
> with *SPEED*.


I told you 8x it runs fast enough as only-code.

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-20 11:37 -0400
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 08:45 -0700
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-20 11:57 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 09:02 -0700
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-21 01:54 +0000
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 18:57 -0700
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-21 02:45 +0000
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-20 23:01 -0400
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-21 03:56 +0000
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-21 11:06 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-21 16:13 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-21 17:27 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 19:07 +0000
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 19:01 -0700
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 09:37 +0000
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-22 08:33 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 22:03 +0000
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 18:22 -0400
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 19:48 +0000
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-22 17:24 -0400
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 22:18 +0000
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 22:26 +0000
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 22:43 +0000
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 22:50 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 22:57 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-23 13:07 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-23 09:58 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 21:48 +0000
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-22 17:00 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 21:56 +0000
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-22 19:39 -0400
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-23 15:25 +0000
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 13:14 -0400
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-23 18:37 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 16:50 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-23 21:15 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 18:36 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-23 23:24 +0000
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-22 08:21 -0400
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-22 10:04 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-23 00:09 -0400
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 00:18 -0400
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-23 05:59 +0000
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 12:46 -0400
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 19:04 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 20:40 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 17:48 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 22:14 +0000
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-23 23:15 -0400
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 23:30 -0400
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-24 08:52 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-24 10:06 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-24 15:59 +0000
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-24 15:45 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 10:19 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-25 20:26 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 23:24 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 05:03 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 11:40 -0400
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-25 15:14 +0000
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 12:05 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-25 18:06 +0000
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 12:41 -0400
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-26 18:03 +0000
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 17:39 -0400
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 05:50 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 06:43 -0500
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-27 13:11 +0100
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 13:32 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 07:32 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 15:02 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 08:17 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 16:21 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 09:42 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 21:39 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 23:25 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 05:34 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 05:37 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 05:42 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 11:45 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 16:23 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 18:40 +0200
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 09:58 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 20:57 +0200
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 12:06 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 22:44 +0200
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 13:38 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 11:07 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 15:51 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 13:30 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-27 21:38 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-28 11:33 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 09:14 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-28 14:17 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 18:49 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:42 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 13:42 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-29 10:54 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 11:20 -0700
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-30 00:31 +0200
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 19:00 -0400
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-30 10:36 -0400
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-02 07:54 -0500
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-02 15:55 +0200
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-02 07:23 -0700
                Snit digest 215 / 2016-05-02 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-02 14:39 +0000
                Re: Snit digest 215 / 2016-05-02 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-02 07:54 -0700
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-02 14:36 +0000
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-02 07:53 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 11:11 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 14:44 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 17:53 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-29 23:56 +0200
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 18:09 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-29 19:09 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 07:31 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-01 08:21 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 08:47 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-02 14:54 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-02 21:54 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-28 15:39 -0600
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:48 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-29 16:57 -0600
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-27 21:33 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-28 05:45 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 21:32 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-27 21:48 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 22:57 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 05:44 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 16:32 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 23:05 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 03:20 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-28 09:52 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-29 02:46 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:33 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-30 09:31 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 05:42 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 06:17 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 06:56 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-28 05:46 -0400

csiph-web