I was making a simple maths calculator in kotlin, an error appeared on my screen when I tried to initialize the value of one of the variables used as 0.00 for float integer.
var x:Float= readLine()!!.toFloat()
var y:Float= readLine()!!.toFloat()
var sum:Float=0.00// the error message is showcased in this line
sum=x+y
println("Addition " + sum)
This is a key difference between Java and Kotlin. Kotlin does not do numeric type promotion like Java does. The comments to your question are showing you how to deal with this, by either matching up the two types Double and/or Float to begin with, or by explicitly converting one or the other so that the two types match up.
Your problems goes away if you make use of Kotlin's ability to infer variable types by taking the type specifications off of your variable definitions. The fact that Kotlin infers types is one reason it does not promote numeric types. Mixing the two would lead to a lot of confusion.
Here's an example of how to fix and simplify your code's type mismatch issues using type inference:
var x = readLine()!!.toFloat()
var y = readLine()!!.toFloat()
var sum = x + y
println("Addition " + sum)
I understand that this may be just test code that you're using to understand Kotlin better. With that said, I'll point out that this code will crash if your user types in non-numeric input. You could fix this by putting a try/catch around your input lines, and providing an nice error message. You might want to put each input in a loop, continuing to ask for an input until the user does provide a response that is of the expected format.
Related
I am trying to solve a problem involving the equating of sums of exponentials.
This is how I would do it hardcoded:
#NLconstraint(m, exp(x[25])==exp(x[14])+exp(x[18]))
This works fine with the rest of the code. However, when I try to do it for an arbitrary set of equations like the above I get an error. Here's my code:
#NLconstraint(m,[k=1:length(LHSSum)],sum(exp.(LHSSum[k][i]) for i=1:length(LHSSum[k]))==sum(exp.(RHSSum[k][i]) for i=1:length(RHSSum[k])))
where LHSSum and RHSSum are arrays containing arrays of the elements that need to be exponentiated and then summed over. That is LHSSum[1]=[x[1],x[2],x[3],...,x[n]]. Where x[i] are variables of type JuMP.Variable. Note that length(LHSSum)=length(RHSSum).
The error returned is:
LoadError: exp is not defined for type Variable. Are you trying to build a nonlinear problem? Make sure you use #NLconstraint/#NLobjective.
So a simple solution would be to simply do all the exponentiating and summing outside of the #NLconstraint function, so the input would be a scalar. However, this too presents a problem since exp(x) is not defined since x is of type JuMP.variable, whereas exp expects something of type real. This is strange since I am able to calculate exponentials just fine when the function is called within an #NLconstraint(). I.e. when I code this line#NLconstraint(m,exp(x)==exp(z)+exp(y)) instead of the earlier line, no errors are thrown.
Another thing I thought to do would be a Taylor Series expansion, but this too presents a problem since it goes into #NLconstraint land for powers greater than 2, and then I get stuck with the same vectorization problem.
So I feel stuck, I feel like if JuMP would allow for the vectorized evaluation of #NLconstraint like it does for #constraint, this would not even be an issue. Another fix would be if JuMP implements it's own exp function to allow for the exponentiation of JuMP.Variable type. However, as it is I don't see a way to solve this problem in general using the JuMP framework. Do any of you have any solutions to this problem? Any clever workarounds that I am missing?
I'm confused why i isn't used in the expressions you wrote. Do you mean:
#NLconstraint(m, [k = 1:length(LHSSum)],
sum(exp(LHSSum[k][i]) for i in 1:length(LHSSum[k]))
==
sum(exp(RHSSum[k][i]) for i in 1:length(RHSSum[k])))
I'm currently trying to perform a dynamic lossless assignment in an ABAP 7.0v SP26 environment.
Background:
I want to read in a csv file and move it into an internal structure without any data losses. Therefore, I declared the field-symbols:
<lfs_field> TYPE any which represents a structure component
<lfs_element> TYPE string which holds a csv value
Approach:
My current "solution" is this (lo_field is an element description of <lfs_field>):
IF STRLEN( <lfs_element> ) > lo_field->output_length.
RAISE EXCEPTION TYPE cx_sy_conversion_data_loss.
ENDIF.
I don't know how precisely it works, but seems to catch the most obvious cases.
Attempts:
MOVE EXACT <lfs_field> TO <lfs_element>.
...gives me...
Unable to interpret "EXACT". Possible causes: Incorrect spelling or comma error
...while...
COMPUTE EXACT <lfs_field> = <lfs_element>.
...results in...
Incorrect statement: "=" missing .
As the ABAP version is too old I also cannot use EXACT #( ... )
Example:
In this case I'm using normal variables. Lets just pretend they are field-symbols:
DATA: lw_element TYPE string VALUE '10121212212.1256',
lw_field TYPE p DECIMALS 2.
lw_field = lw_element.
* lw_field now contains 10121212212.13 without any notice about the precision loss
So, how would I do a perfect valid lossless assignment with field-symbols?
Don't see an easy way around that. Guess that's why they introduced MOVE EXACT in the first place.
Note that output_length is not a clean solution. For example, string always has output_length 0, but will of course be able to hold a CHAR3 with output_length 3.
Three ideas how you could go about your question:
Parse and compare types. Parse the source field to detect format and length, e.g. "character-like", "60 places". Then get an element descriptor for the target field and check whether the source fits into the target. Don't think it makes sense to start collecting the possibly large CASEs for this here. If you have access to a newer ABAP, you could try generating a large test data set there and use it to reverse-engineer the compatibility rules from MOVE EXACT.
Back-and-forth conversion. Move the value from source to target and back and see whether it changes. If it changes, the fields aren't compatible. This is unprecise, as some formats will change although the values remain the same; for example, -42 could change to 42-, although this is the same in ABAP.
To-longer conversion. Move the field from source to target. Then construct a slightly longer version of target, and move source also there. If the two targets are identical, the fields are compatible. This fails at the boundaries, i.e. if it's not possible to construct a slightly-longer version, e.g. because the maximum number of decimal places of a P field is reached.
DATA target TYPE char3.
DATA source TYPE string VALUE `123.5`.
DATA(lo_target) = CAST cl_abap_elemdescr( cl_abap_elemdescr=>describe_by_data( target ) ).
DATA(lo_longer) = cl_abap_elemdescr=>get_by_kind(
p_type_kind = lo_target->type_kind
p_length = lo_target->length + 1
p_decimals = lo_target->decimals + 1 ).
DATA lv_longer TYPE REF TO data.
CREATE DATA lv_longer TYPE HANDLE lo_longer.
ASSIGN lv_longer->* TO FIELD-SYMBOL(<longer>).
<longer> = source.
target = source.
IF <longer> = target.
WRITE `Fits`.
ELSE.
WRITE `Doesn't fit, ` && target && ` is different from ` && <longer>.
ENDIF.
I've been breaking my head over this for a few days now and can't seem to be able to figure it out. Perhaps it's glaringly obvious, but I don't seem to be able to spot it. I've read up on all the basics of unicode, UTF-8, UTF-16, normalisation, etc, but to no avail. Hopefully somebody's able to help me out here...
I'm using Go's Value function from the testing/quick package to generate random values for the fields in my data structs, in order to implement the Generator interface for the structs in question. Specifically, given a Metadata struct, I've defined the implementation as follows:
func (m *Metadata) Generate(r *rand.Rand, size int) (value reflect.Value) {
value = reflect.ValueOf(m).Elem()
for i := 0; i < value.NumField(); i++ {
if t, ok := quick.Value(value.Field(i).Type(), r); ok {
value.Field(i).Set(t)
}
}
return
}
Now, in doing so, I'll end up with both the receiver and the return value being set with random generated values of the appropriate type (strings, ints, etc. in the receiver and reflect.Value in the returned reflect.Value).
Now, the implementation for the Value function states that it will return something of type []rune converted to type string. As far as I know, this should allow me to then use the functions in the runes, unicode and norm packages to define a filter which filters out everything which is not part of 'Latin', 'Letter' or 'Number'. I defined the following filter which uses a transform to filter out letters which are not in those character rangetables (as defined in the unicode package):
func runefilter(in reflect.Value) (out reflect.Value) {
out = in // Make sure you return something
if in.Kind() == reflect.String {
instr := in.String()
t := transform.Chain(norm.NFD, runes.Remove(runes.NotIn(rangetable.Merge(unicode.Letter, unicode.Latin, unicode.Number))), norm.NFC)
outstr, _, _ := transform.String(t, instr)
out = reflect.ValueOf(outstr)
}
return
}
Now, I think I've tried just about anything, but I keep ending up with a series of strings which are far from the Latin range, e.g.:
𥗉똿穊
𢷽嚶
秓䝏小𪖹䮋
𪿝ท솲
𡉪䂾
ʋ𥅮ᦸ
堮𡹯憨𥗼𧵕ꥆ
𢝌𐑮𧍛併怃𥊇
鯮
𣏲𝐒
⓿ꐠ槹𬠂黟
𢼭踁퓺𪇖
俇𣄃𔘧
𢝶
𝖸쩈𤫐𢬿詢𬄙
𫱘𨆟𑊙
欓
So, can anybody explain what I'm overlooking here and how I could instead define a transformer which removes/replaces non-letter/number/latin characters so that I can use the Value function as intended (but with a smaller subset of 'random' characters)?
Thanks!
Confusingly the Generate interface needs a function using the type not a the pointer to the type. You want your type signature to look like
func (m Metadata) Generate(r *rand.Rand, size int) (value reflect.Value)
You can play with this here. Note: the most important thing to do in that playground is to switch the type of the generate function from m Metadata to m *Metadata and see that Hi Mom! never prints.
In addition, I think you would be better served using your own type and writing a generate method for that type using a list of all of the characters you want to use. For example:
type LatinString string
const latin = "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz01233456789"
and then use the generator
func (l LatinString) Generate(rand *rand.Rand, size int) reflect.Value {
var buffer bytes.Buffer
for i := 0; i < size; i++ {
buffer.WriteString(string(latin[rand.Intn(len(latin))]))
}
s := LatinString(buffer.String())
return reflect.ValueOf(s)
}
playground
Edit: also this library is pretty cool, thanks for showing it to me
The answer to my own question is, it seems, a combination of the answers provided in the comments by #nj_ and #jimb and the answer provided by #benjaminkadish.
In short, the answer boils down to:
"Not such a great idea as you thought it was", or "Bit of an ill-posed question"
"You were using the union of 'Letter', 'Latin' and 'Number' (Letter || Number || Latin), instead of the intersection of 'Latin' with the union of 'Letter' and 'Number' ((Letter || Number) && Latin))
Now for the longer version...
The idea behind me using the testing/quick package is that I wanted random data for (fuzzy) testing of my code. In the past, I've always written the code for doing things like that myself, again and again. This meant a lot of the same code across different projects. Now, I could of course written my own package for it, but it turns out that, even better than that, there's actually a standard package which does just about exactly what I want.
Now, it turns out the package does exactly what I want very well. The codepoints in the strings which it generates are actually random and not just restricted to what we're accustomed to using in everyday life. Now, this is of course exactly the thing which you want in doing fuzzy testing in order to test the code with values outside the usual assumptions.
In practice, that means I'm running into two problems:
There's some limits on what I would consider reasonable input for a string. Meaning that, in testing the processing of a Name field or a URL field, I can reasonably assume there's not going to be a value like 'James Mc⌢' (let alone 'James Mc🙁') or 'www.🕸site.com', but just 'James McFrown' and 'www.website.com'. Hence, I can't expect a reasonable system to be able to support it. Of course, things shouldn't completely break down, but it also can't be expected to handle the former examples without any problems.
When I filter the generated string on values which one might consider reasonable, the chance of ending up with a valid string is very small. The set of possible characters in the set used by the testing/quick is just so large (0x10FFFF) and the set of reasonable characters so small, you end up with empty strings most of the time.
So, what do we need to take away from this?
So, whilst I hoped to use the standard testing/quick package to replace my often repeated code to generate random data for fuzzy testing, it does this so well that it provides data outside the range of what I would consider reasonable for the code to be able to handle. It seems that the choice, in the end, is to:
Either be able to actually handle all fuzzy options, meaning that if somebody's name is 'Arnold 💰💰' ('Arnold Moneybags'), it shouldn't go arse over end. Or...
Use custom/derived types with their own Generator. This means you're going to have to use the derived type instead of the basic type throughout the code. (Comparable to defining a string as wchar_t instead of char in C++ and working with those by default.). Or...
Don't use testing/quick for fuzzy testing, because as soon as you run into a generated string value, you can (and should) get a very random string.
As always, further comments are of course welcome, as it's quite possible I overlooked something.
So, I'm writing a language using flex/bison and I'm having difficulty with implementing identifiers, specifically when it comes to knowing when you're looking at an assignment or a reference,
for example:
1) A = 1+2
2) B + C (where B and C have already been assigned values)
Example one I can work out by returning an ID token from flex to bison, and just following a grammar that recognizes that 1+2 is an integer expression, putting A into the symbol table, and setting its value.
examples two and three are more difficult for me because: after going through my lexer, what's being returned in ex.2 to bison is "ID PLUS ID" -> I have a grammar that recognizes arithmetic expressions for numerical values, like INT PLUS INT (which would produce an INT), or DOUBLE MINUS INT (which would produce a DOUBLE). if I have "ID PLUS ID", how do I know what type the return value is?
Here's the best idea that I've come up with so far: When tokenizing, every time an ID comes up, I search for its value and type in the symbol table and switch out the ID token with its respective information; for example: while tokenizing, I come across B, which has a regex that matches it as being an ID. I look in my symbol table and see that it has a value of 51.2 and is a DOUBLE. So instead of returning ID, with a value of B to bison, I'm returning DOUBLE with a value of 51.2
I have two different solutions that contradict each other. Here's why: if I want to assign a value to an ID, I would say to my compiler A = 5. In this situation, if I'm using my previously described solution, What I'm going to get after everything is tokenized might be, INT ASGN INT, or STRING ASGN INT, etc... So, in this case, I would use the former solution, as opposed to the latter.
My question would be: what kind of logical device do I use to help my compiler know which solution to use?
NOTE: I didn't think it necessary to post source code to describe my conundrum, but I will if anyone could use it effectively as a reference to help me understand their input on this topic.
Thank you.
The usual way is to have a yacc/bison rule like:
expr: ID { $$ = lookupId($1); }
where the the lookupId function looks up a symbol in the symbol table and returns its type and value (or type and storage location if you're writing a compiler rather than a strict interpreter). Then, your other expr rules don't need to care whether their operands come from constants or symbols or other expressions:
expr: expr '+' expr { $$ = DoAddition($1, $3); }
The function DoAddition takes the types and values (or locations) for its two operands and either adds them, producing a result, or produces code to do the addition at run time.
If possible redesign your language so that the situation is unambiguous. This is why even Javascript has var.
Otherwise you're going to need to disambiguate via semantic rules, for example that the first use of an identifier is its declaration. I don't see what the problem is with your case (2): just generate the appropriate code. If B and C haven't been used yet, a value-reading use like this should be illegal, but that involves you in control flow analysis if taken to the Nth degree of accuracy, so you might prefer to assume initial values of zero.
In any case you can see that it's fundamentally a language design problem rather than a coding problem.
I am creating a WCF in vb.net inside VS 2010. I have a handful of properties that are currently bytes (0 - 255) and represent different test scores. Is it possible for me to create my own type based on this that will only allow values between 0 and 110? For example, if I have
Dim a as Byte
a = 256
I will get "Constant expression not representable in type 'Byte'." before the code is compiled. I want to have something like this for my own type so the below code would give me "Constant expression not representable in type 'myByte'."
Dim a as myByte
a = 110
You can only use predefined (native) types, as Byte, and implement some features, like overloading operators to check minimum and maximum values. However, not every operator can be overloaded, what, in this case, includes the assignement operator '='.
Check http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8edha89s%28v=vs.71%29.aspx and the tutorials if it helps somewhat.
To assign a value tp your type you can make use of properties or methods that set the value checking for boudaries and other conditions, perfectly doable.
But to define it as a native... negative, sir.
Nope, I don't think that's possible. You'll have to use a constructor to initialize your myByte instance and do the range check at runtime (not sure how useful that would be).