Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Clip] Finding Minimum Value in Array

Expand Messages
  • Don - HtmlFixIt.com
    Doesn t work Hugo, ^!SetListDelimiter , ^!SetArray %Array%=3,8,329,7,10.34,4,9,6,2,5,11 ^!SetListDelimiter ^%NL% ^!SetArray
    Message 1 of 15 , Nov 2, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Doesn't work Hugo,

      ^!SetListDelimiter ,
      ^!SetArray %Array%=3,8,329,7,10.34,4,9,6,2,5,11
      ^!SetListDelimiter ^%NL%
      ^!SetArray
      %Array%=^$StrSort("^$StrReplace(",";"^%NL%";"^%Array%";0;0)$";False;True;False)$
      ^!Info ^%Array1% ^%NL% ^%Array%

      You just got lucky :-)

      We always zero pad because I use your method to zero pad. We need a
      numeric sort I think in addition to ANSI and false_ANSI

      Hugo Paulissen wrote:
      > Hi Flo,
      >
      > You can do this without evaluation. In the past I have used something along these lines:
      >
      > ^!SetListDelimiter ,
      > ^!SetArray %Array%=3,8,329,1,1.25,7,10.34,4,9,6,2,5,11
      > ^!SetListDelimiter ^%NL%
      > ^!SetArray %Array%=^$StrSort("^$StrReplace(",";"^%NL%";"^%Array%";0;0)$";False;True;False)$
      > ^!Info ^%Array1% ^%NL% ^%Array%

      >
      > Regards,
      >
      > Hugo
      >
    • Hugo Paulissen
        Hi Don,   Quite possible that I just got lucky ;-), but I m not so sure we need a numeric sort for this. I do not recall the reason for the zero-padding,
      Message 2 of 15 , Nov 2, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
         
        Hi Don,
         
        Quite possible that I just got lucky ;-), but I'm not so sure we need a numeric sort for this. I do not recall the reason for the zero-padding, but it doesn't seem necessary in this case.
         
        In any case: if I add some other values to the array, it appears that the lowest value is returned every single time.
         
        ^!SetArray %Array%=03,8,329,1,1.25,7,10.34,4,9,6,2,5,11,0.25,0.1,10000,20,0.0119,10,0.012
         
        Hugo
         
         
        >>> 
        Doesn't work Hugo,

        ^!SetListDelimiter ,
        ^!SetArray %Array%=3,8, 329,7,10. 34,4,9,6, 2,5,11
        ^!SetListDelimiter ^%NL%
        ^!SetArray
        %Array%=^$StrSort( "^$StrReplace( ",";"^%NL% ";"^%Array% ";0;0)$"; False;True; False)$
        ^!Info ^%Array1% ^%NL% ^%Array%

        You just got lucky :-)

        We always zero pad because I use your method to zero pad. We need a
        numeric sort




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Hugo Paulissen
        OK Don, Sorry Flo, Forget my last post; I see what you mean... Now I *do* remember the padding zero issue! It s getting rusty inside... Hugo
        Message 3 of 15 , Nov 2, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          OK Don, Sorry Flo,

          Forget my last post; I see what you mean... Now I *do* remember the padding zero issue! It's getting rusty inside...

          Hugo




          ________________________________
          From: Hugo Paulissen <hugopaulissen@...>
          To: ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Mon, November 2, 2009 4:28:06 PM
          Subject: Re: [Clip] Finding Minimum Value in Array

           
           
          Hi Don,
           
          Quite possible that I just got lucky ;-), but I'm not so sure we need a numeric sort for this. I do not recall the reason for the zero-padding, but it doesn't seem necessary in this case.
           
          In any case: if I add some other values to the array, it appears that the lowest value is returned every single time.
           
          ^!SetArray %Array%=03,8, 329,1,1.25, 7,10.34,4, 9,6,2,5,11, 0.25,0.1, 10000,20, 0.0119,10, 0.012
           
          Hugo
           
           
          >>> 
          Doesn't work Hugo,

          ^!SetListDelimiter ,
          ^!SetArray %Array%=3,8, 329,7,10. 34,4,9,6, 2,5,11
          ^!SetListDelimiter ^%NL%
          ^!SetArray
          %Array%=^$StrSort( "^$StrReplace( ",";"^%NL% ";"^%Array% ";0;0)$"; False;True; False)$
          ^!Info ^%Array1% ^%NL% ^%Array%

          You just got lucky :-)

          We always zero pad because I use your method to zero pad. We need a
          numeric sort

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • flo.gehrke
          ... Hugo, Don, I don t think that Hugo was wrong. There has always been some confusion about this issue (cf message #19038 ff). The trick is the ^%NL% as
          Message 4 of 15 , Nov 2, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, Hugo Paulissen <hugopaulissen@...> wrote:
            >
            > OK Don, Sorry Flo,
            >
            > Forget my last post; I see what you mean... Now I *do* remember the padding zero issue! It's getting rusty inside...
            >
            > Hugo

            Hugo, Don,

            I don't think that Hugo was wrong. There has always been some confusion about this issue (cf message #19038 ff).

            The trick is the ^%NL% as delimiter. With the semicolon as the default delimiter the array won't get sorted:

            ^!SetArray %Array%=9;8;7;6;5
            ^!Info Array unsorted:^P^%Array%
            ^!SetArray %Array%=^$StrSort("^%Array%";0;1;0)$
            ^!Info Sorting failed: ^%Array%
            ^!Info Wrong minimum value: ^%Array1%

            The clip outputs '9' which doesn't meet our intentions. With ^P as delimiter it doesn't work either.

            With ^%NL% (which replaces the comma in Hugo's solution)...

            ^!SetListDelimiter ^%NL%
            ^!SetArray %Array%=9^%NL%8^%NL%7^%NL%6^%NL%5
            ^!Info Array unsorted:^P^%Array%
            ^!SetArray %Array%=^$StrSort("^%Array%";0;1;0)$
            ^!Info Array correctly sorted:^P^%Array%
            ^!Info Minimum value: ^%Array1%

            the array gets sorted and the clip outputs the minimum value in the array. Nevertheless, it's still a normal ANSI sorting of digits and no numeric sorting.

            Regards,
            Flo
          • Don - HtmlFixIt.com
            I am pretty sure you are just picking lucky numbers to use and thus getting lucky :-) I agree that you need the line breaks as delimiter because we are sorting
            Message 5 of 15 , Nov 2, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              I am pretty sure you are just picking lucky numbers to use and thus
              getting lucky :-)

              I agree that you need the line breaks as delimiter because we are
              sorting lines, not data elements. But it will not do what you wanted,
              give the minimum unless you zero pad. You can however add zero padding,
              sort, strip and output if you wish.

              I mistakenly did not include the correct numbers in my prior example.

              :Mine
              ^!SetListDelimiter ,
              ^!SetArray %Array%=8,329,7,4,9,6,5
              ^!SetListDelimiter ^%NL%
              ^!SetArray
              %Array%=^$StrSort("^$StrReplace(",";"^%NL%";"^%Array%";0;0)$";False;True;False)$
              ^!Info ^%Array1% ^%NL% ^%Array%


              :Flo
              ^!SetListDelimiter ^%NL%
              ^!SetArray %Array%=8^%NL%329^%NL%7^%NL%4^%NL%9^%NL%6^%NL%5
              ^!Info Array unsorted:^P^%Array%
              ^!SetArray %Array%=^$StrSort("^%Array%";0;1;0)$
              ^!Info Array correctly sorted:^P^%Array%
              ^!Info Minimum value: ^%Array1%

              Notice I also used NL in my example because we figured that one out many
              years ago -- look up my username and zero padding ....

              329 comes out on top in the above examples because 3 is the lowest
              number. Hugo and I have done the zero padding bit many times over the
              years as I use his method for it.

              flo.gehrke wrote:
              > --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, Hugo Paulissen <hugopaulissen@...> wrote:
              >> OK Don, Sorry Flo,
              >>
              >> Forget my last post; I see what you mean... Now I *do* remember the padding zero issue! It's getting rusty inside...
              >>
              >> Hugo
              >
              > Hugo, Don,
              >
              > I don't think that Hugo was wrong. There has always been some confusion about this issue (cf message #19038 ff).
              >
              > The trick is the ^%NL% as delimiter. With the semicolon as the default delimiter the array won't get sorted:
            • flo.gehrke
              ... Don, ... Yes, Don, you are absolutely right. Now it was getting rusty inside for me ;-) I should have known better since I already said: Nevertheless,
              Message 6 of 15 , Nov 2, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, "Don - HtmlFixIt.com" <don@...> wrote:
                >
                > I am pretty sure you are just picking lucky numbers to use and thus
                > getting lucky :-)

                Don,

                > 329 comes out on top in the above examples because 3 is the
                > lowest number.

                Yes, Don, you are absolutely right. Now it was "getting rusty inside" for me ;-)

                I should have known better since I already said: "Nevertheless, it's still a normal ANSI sorting of digits and no numeric sorting."

                So a better numeric sorting remains on the wish list. Something like...

                ^$StrSort("Str";Numeric;Ascending;RemoveDuplicates)$

                (as you had in mind before). I hope Eric Fookes will read this...

                Regards,
                Flo
              • Art Kocsis
                I agree that NoteTab needs a numeric sort period, not just in the clip functions but in the editor itself. Under the assumption that the clip sort is a mirror
                Message 7 of 15 , Nov 3, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  I agree that NoteTab needs a numeric sort period, not just in the clip
                  functions but in the editor itself. Under the assumption that the clip sort
                  is a mirror of the editor sort you can easily see the results (and
                  fallacies), of all the arrays in this thread. Even zero padding is not an
                  answer:

                  Copy Hugo's last array to NTB, change all the commas to ^P and sort:
                  ^!SetArray %Array%=03,8,329,1,1.25,7,10.34,4,9,6,
                  2,5,11,0.25,0.1,10000,20,0.0119,10,0.012
                  Notice the "03" is less than "1", "11" is less than 2", and so on.

                  And while we're at it, NoteTab also sorely needs a major/minor column sort.
                  Jody's clip has never worked for me so I am left with going to Ultra Edit
                  for anything other than trivial column one sorts. The lack of column sorts
                  is a PITA and an unnecessary waste of time.

                  BTW, UE not only does the numeric sorts but preserved the leading zero
                  padding characters while correctly sorting the numeric values.

                  Art


                  At 02-11-2009 12:29, you wrote:
                  >--- In <mailto:ntb-clips%40yahoogroups.com>ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, "Don
                  >- HtmlFixIt.com" <don@...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > I am pretty sure you are just picking lucky numbers to use and thus
                  > > getting lucky :-)
                  >
                  >Don,
                  >
                  > > 329 comes out on top in the above examples because 3 is the
                  > > lowest number.
                  >
                  >Yes, Don, you are absolutely right. Now it was "getting rusty inside" for
                  >me ;-)
                  >
                  >I should have known better since I already said: "Nevertheless, it's still
                  >a normal ANSI sorting of digits and no numeric sorting."
                  >
                  >So a better numeric sorting remains on the wish list. Something like...
                  >
                  >^$StrSort("Str";Numeric;Ascending;RemoveDuplicates)$
                  >
                  >(as you had in mind before). I hope Eric Fookes will read this...
                  >
                  >Regards,
                  >Flo

                  ----------


                  No virus found in this outgoing message.
                  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                  Version: 8.5.424 / Virus Database: 270.14.47/2478 - Release Date: 11/03/09 07:36:00


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.