the idea is to take a word and sub out all specified letters for another letter.
Any help on how to make this kind of function work?
The last array_push is not being called because you're returning before. Change it to:
array_push($stepsinchain, $subed);
return $subed;
Since $subed is never stored in the $stepsinchain array, due to the return being before, you're not able to access previous alternations.
array_push is also slower and not recommended when entering one element in an array. Instead, use
$stepsinchain[] = $subed;
It is also much faster as documented at http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.array-push.php#Hcom83388
Related
I'm using GameMaker:Studio Pro and trying to execute a script stored in a variable as below:
script = close_dialog;
script_execute(script);
It doesn't work. It's obviously looking for a script named "script". Anyone know how I can accomplish this?
This question's quite old now, but in case anyone else ends up here via google (as I did), here's something I found that worked quite well and avoids the need for any extra data structures as reference:
scriptToCall = asset_get_index(scr_scriptName);
script_execute(scriptToCall);
The first line here creates the variable scriptToCall and then assigns to it Game Maker's internal ID number for the script you want to call. This allows script_execute to correctly find the script from the ID, which doesn't work if you try to pass it a string containing the script name.
I'm using this to define which scripts should be called in a particular situation from an included txt file, hence the need to convert a string into an addressable script ID!
You seem to have some confusion over how Game Maker works, so I will try to address this before I get around to the actual question.
GML is a rather simple-minded beast, it only knows two data types: strings and numbers. Everything else (objects, sprites, scripts, data structures, instances and so on) is represented with a number in your GML code.
For example, you might have an object called "Player" which has all kinds of fancy events, but to the code Player is just a constant number which you can (e.g.) print out with show_message(string(Player));
Now, the function script_execute(script) takes as argument the ID of the script that should be executed. That ID is just a normal number. script_execute will find the script with that ID in some internal table and then run the script.
In other words, instead of calling script_execute(close_dialog) you could just as well call script_execute(14) if you happened to know that the ID of close_dialog is 14 (although that is bad practice, since it make the code difficult to understand and brittle against ID changes).
Now it should be obvious that assigning the numeric value of close_dialog to a variable first and then calling script_execute on that variable is perfectly OK. In the end, script_execute only cares about the number that is passed, not about the name of the variable that this number comes from.
If you are thinking ahead a bit, you might wonder whether you need script_execute at all then, or if you could instead just do this:
script = close_dialog;
script();
In my opinion, it would be perfectly fine to allow this in the language, but it does not work - the function call operator actually does care about the name of the thing you try to call.
Now with that background out of the way, on to your actual question. If close_dialog is actually a script, your suggested code will work fine. If it is an extension function (or a built-in function -- I don't own Studio so what do I know) then it does not actually have an ID, and you can't call it with script_execute. In fact, you can't even assign close_dialog to a variable then because it does not have any value in GML -- all you can do with it then is call it. To work around this though, you could create a script (say, close_dialog_script which only calls close_dialog, which you can then use just as above.
Edit: Since it does not seem to work anyway, check whether you have a different resource by the name of close_dialog (perhaps a button sprite). This kind of conflict could mean that close_dialog gives you the ID of the sprite, not of the script, while calling the script directly would still work.
After much discussion on the forums, I ended up going with this method.
I wrote a script called script_id()
var sid;
sid = 6; //6 = scriptnotfound script :)
switch (argument0) {
case "load_room":
sid = 0;
break;
case "show_dialog":
sid = 1;
break;
case "close_dialog":
sid = 3;
break;
case "scrExample":
sid = 4;
break;
}
return sid;
So now I can call script_execute(script_id("close_dialog"));
I hate it, but it's better than keeping a spreadsheet... in my opinion.
There's also another way, with execute_string();
Should look like this:
execute_string(string(scriptName) + "();");
Lets say my ArrayList got 20 elements. Well, sometime in runtime I will want it to only have 10 elements, so the other 10 indexes(from 9 to 19) don't exist at all. How do I do that?
Why are you using non-generic collections at all? Use List<T> instead. And you can use the Remove() method on it.
Since your working with ArrayLists, and not Arrays, just use ArrayList.Remove() for a single part, and ArrayList.RemoveRange(x, list.Count-x) for a range.
If you're looking to avoid using memory space for the elements that are not present, you can try with the TrimToSize method:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.collections.arraylist.trimtosize.aspx
It will minimize the array overhead, by limiting the capacity to the current items.
If they already exist, you'll need to remove them and then, call this method.
I'm not sure what you're looking for exactly, so more details would be great.
If you just want to remove the elements without changing the capacity, you can use ArrayList.RemoveRange:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.collections.arraylist.removerange.aspx
arrayList.RemoveRange(10, list.Count-10)
This method can be used with any other valid range, if you e.g. want to delete the first ten elements instead.
This might be an odd question, but I'm looking for a word to use in a function name. I'm normally good at coming up with succinct, meaningful function names, but this one has me stumped so I thought I'd appeal for help.
The function will take some desired state as an argument and compare it to the current state. If no change is needed, the function will exit normally without doing anything. Otherwise, the function will take some action to achieve the desired state.
For example, if wanted to make sure the front door was closed, i might say:
my_house.<something>_front_door('closed')
What word or term should use in place of the something? I'd like it to be short, readable, and minimize the astonishment factor.
A couple clarifying points...
I would want someone calling the function to intuitively know they didn't need to wrap the function an 'if' that checks the current state. For example, this would be bad:
if my_house.front_door_is_open():
my_house.<something>_front_door('closed')
Also, they should know that the function won't throw an exception if the desired state matches the current state. So this should never happen:
try:
my_house.<something>_front_door('closed')
except DoorWasAlreadyClosedException:
pass
Here are some options I've considered:
my_house.set_front_door('closed')
my_house.setne_front_door('closed') # ne=not equal, from the setne x86 instruction
my_house.ensure_front_door('closed')
my_house.configure_front_door('closed')
my_house.update_front_door('closed')
my_house.make_front_door('closed')
my_house.remediate_front_door('closed')
And I'm open to other forms, but most I've thought of don't improve readability. Such as...
my_house.ensure_front_door_is('closed')
my_house.conditionally_update_front_door('closed')
my_house.change_front_door_if_needed('closed')
Thanks for any input!
I would use "ensure" as its succinct, descriptive and to the point:
EnsureCustomerExists(CustomerID)
EnsureDoorState(DoorStates.Closed)
EnsureUserInterface(GUIStates.Disabled)
Interesting question!
From the info that you have supplied, it seems to me that setstate (or simply set, if you are setting other things than states) would be fine, though ensure is good if you want to really emphasize the redundancy of an if.
To me it is however perfectly intuitive that setting a state does not throw an exception, or require an if. Think of setting the state of any other variable:
In C:
int i;
i = 5; // Would you expect this to throw an exception if i was already 5?
// Would you write
if (i != 5)
i = 5;
// ?
Also it only takes about one sentence to document this behaviour:
The function does nothing if the
current state equals the requested
state.
EDIT: Actually, thinking about it, if it is really important to you (for some reason) that the user is not confused about this, I would in fact pick ensure (or some other non-standard name). Why? Because as a user, a name like that would make me scratch my head a bit and look up the documentation ("This is more than just an ordinary set-function, apparently").
EDIT 2: Only you know how you design your programs, and which function name fits in best. From what you are saying, it seems like your setting functions sometimes throw exceptions, and you need to name a setting function that doesn't - e.g. set_missile_target. If that is the case, I think you should consider the set_if, set_when, set_cond or cond_set names. Which one would kind of depend on the rest of your code. I would also add that one line of documentation (or two, if you're generous), which clarifies the whole thing.
For example:
// Sets missile target if current target is not already the requested target,
// in which case it does nothing. No exceptions are thrown.
function cond_set_missile_target ()
or function cond_set_MissileTarget ()
or function condSet_MissileTarget ()
or function condSetMissileTarget ()
ensure is not so bad, but to me it implies only that there is additional logic required to set the state (e.g. multiple states tied together, or other complications). It helps to make the user avoid adding unnecessary ifs, but it does not help much with the exception issue. I would expect an ensure function to throw an exception sooner than a set function, since the ensure function clearly has more responsibilities for, well, ensuring that this setting operation is in fact done right.
I'd go for ensure for the function you describe. I'd also use camelCase, but I suppose you may be in a language that prefers underscores.
You could always document (shock!) your API so that others don't make the mistakes you describe.
I need to remove leading zeros from a string field in an Access database that is destroyed and recreated every time it is used within a C# program. Most string libraries (even SQL ones) include a Trim function to remove leading or following whitespace. Unfortunately, Access does not seem to have a LTrim(string s, char[] trimChars) or something similar. To get around this, I concocted this monstrosity:
Replace(LTrim(Replace(ADDRNO,'0', ' ')),' ', '0')
But this resulted in an undefined function reference for Replace, even though it is obviously an Access function.
What I am looking for is a way to trim these zeros, either by getting the JET engine to let me use the Replace function or by some other method entirely.
EDIT: Fixed syntax of Replace function. Problem still persists.
I suggest
Val(ADDRNO)
It will return the number portion without the leading zeros.
I think it's just the order of your parameters that is wrong:
debug.? Replace("My string", "i", "o") -> "My Strong"
You can use Trim and Replace.
I'm not sure what context you are running this but this seems to show the parameter order is different and uses double quotes instead of single quotes(I haven't used Access in awhile so maybe it doesn't matter), also try square brackets on column name:
http://www.techonthenet.com/access/functions/string/replace.php
Replace(LTrim(Replace([ADDRNO], "0", " "))," ", "0")
If that gives the same error just try the replace function by itself to narrow down the problem:
Replace ("alphabet", "a", "e")
If this works then you know the Replace function works, and there is some other issue.
Edit: If it doesn't work at all, then Replace is likely a VBA function available only in the Access application, and is not part of Jet. You could try some combination of Left/Right function and chop the string up, this can get quite ugly. I personally would just iterate over the record set and use C# code to modify the values. Hopefully you don't have such a large number of records that this would be a problem.
In this question, a user commented to never use the With block in VB. Why?
"Never" is a strong word.
I think it fine as long as you don't abuse it (like nesting)
IMHO - this is better:
With MyCommand.Parameters
.Count = 1
.Item(0).ParameterName = "#baz"
.Item(0).Value = fuz
End With
Than:
MyCommand.Parameters.Count = 1
MyCommand.Parameters.Item(0).ParameterName = "#baz"
MyCommand.Parameters.Item(0).Value = fuz
There is nothing wrong about the With keyword. It's true that it may reduce readibility when nested but the solution is simply don't use nested With.
There may be namespace problems in Delphi, which doesn't enforce a leading dot but that issue simply doesn't exist in VB.NET so the people that are posting rants about Delphi are losing their time in this question.
I think the real reason many people don't like the With keyword is that is not included in C* languages and many programmers automatically think that every feature not included in his/her favourite language is bad.
It's just not helpful compared to other options.
If you really miss it you can create a one or two character alias for your object instead. The alias only takes one line to setup, rather than two for the With block (With + End With lines).
The alias also gives you a quick mouse-over reference for the type of the variable. It provides a hook for the IDE to help you jump back to the top of the block if you want (though if the block is that large you have other problems). It can be passed as an argument to functions. And you can use it to reference an index property.
So we have an alternative that gives more function with less code.
Also see this question:
Why is the with() construct not included in C#, when it is really cool in VB.NET?
The with keyword is only sideswiped in a passing reference here in an hilarious article by the wonderful Verity Stob, but it's worth it for the vitriol: See the paragraph that starts
While we are on identifier confusion. The with keyword...
Worth reading the entire article!
The With keyword also provides another benefit - the object(s) in the With statement only need to be "qualified" once, which can improve performance. Check out the information on MSDN here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/wc500chb(VS.80).aspx
So by all means, use it.