--The view of the table
local originalStats = {
Info = {Visit = false, Name = "None", Characters = 1},
Stats = {Levels = 0, XP = 0, XP2 = 75, Silver = 95},
Inventory = {
Hats = {"NoobHat"},
Robes = {"NoobRobe"},
Boots = {"NoobBoot"},
Weapons = {"NoobSword"}
}
}
local tempData = {}
--The arrangement here
function Module:ReadAll(player)
for k,v in pairs(tempData[player]) do
if type(v) == 'table' then
for k2, v2 in pairs(v) do
print(k2) print(v2)
if type(v2) == 'table' then
for k3, v3 in pairs(v2) do
print(k3) print(v3)
end
else
print(k2) print(v2)
end
end
else
print(k) print(v)
end
end
end
I'm sorry, but I can't seem to figure out how to arrange this 'ReadAll' function to where It'll show all the correct stats in the right orders.
The output is something like this:
Boots
table: 1A73CF10
1
NoobBoot
Weapons
table: 1A7427F0
1
NoobSword
Robes
table: 1A743D50
1
NoobRobe
Hats
table: 1A73C9D0
1
NoobHat
XP2
75
XP2
75
Levels
2
Levels
2
XP
0
XP
0
Here's a way to print all the elements without double or table reference values showing up.
As the name states, this function will print all the elements within a table, no matter how many nested tables there are inside it. I don't have a way to order them at the moment, but I'll update my answer if I find a way. You can also get rid of the empty spaces in the print line, I just used it so it would look neater. Let me know if it works.
function allElementsInTable(table)
for k,v in pairs(table) do
if type(table[k]) == 'table' then
print(k .. ":")
allElementsInTable(v)
else
print(" " .. k .. " = " .. tostring(v))
end
end
end
--place the name of your table in the parameter for this function
allElementsInTable(originalStats)
After more experimenting, I got this, if anyone wants it, feel free to use it.
tempData = { Info = {Visit = false, Name = 'None'},
Stats = {LVL = 0, XP = 0, Silver = 75},
Inventory = { Armors = {'BasicArmor'},
Weapons = {'BasicSword'} }
}
function Read()
for i, v in pairs(tempData['Info']) do
print(i..'\t',v)
end
----------
for i2, v2 in pairs(tempData['Stats']) do
print(i2..'\t',v2)
end
----------
for i3, v3 in pairs(tempData['Inventory']) do
print(i3..':')
for i4, v4 in pairs(v3) do
print('\t',v4)
end
end
end
Read()
Don't expect table's fields to be iterated with pairs() in some specific order. Internally Lua tables are hashtables, and the order of fields in it is not specified at all. It will change between runs, you can't have them iterated in the same order as they were filled.Only arrays with consecutive integer indices will maintain the order of their elements.
Related
I want to merge two strings collections in a case-insensitive manner:
string_collection1 = {"hello","buddy","world","ciao"}
string_collection2 = {"Hello","Buddy","holly","Bye", "bYe"}
merged_string_collection = merge_case_insensitive(string_collection1,string_collection2) --> {"hello","buddy","world","holly","bye","ciao"}
Here's an attempt, but it does not work...
function merge_case_insensitive(t1,t2)
t3 = {}
for _,s1 in pairs(t1) do
for _,s2 in pairs(t2) do
if string.lower(s1) == string.lower(s2) then
t3[s1] = s1
end
end
end
t4 = {}
i = 1
for s,_ in pairs(t3) do
t4[i] = string.lower(s)
i = i + 1
end
return t4
end
string_collection1 = {"hello","buddy","world","ciao"}
string_collection2 = {"Hello","Buddy","holly","Bye", "bYe"}
merged_string_collection = merge_case_insensitive(string_collection1,string_collection2)
for k,v in pairs(merged_string_collection) do print(k,v) end
It does not work because you use == to compare both strings which is case-sensitive.
You could do something like string.lower(s1) == string.lower(s2) to fix that.
Edit:
As you can't figure out the rest yourself, here's some code:
local t1 = {"hello","buddy","world","ciao"}
local t2 = {"Hello","Buddy","holly","Bye", "bYe"}
local aux_table = {}
local merged_table = {}
for k,v in pairs(t1) do
aux_table[v:lower()] = true
end
for k,v in pairs(t2) do
aux_table[v:lower()] = true
end
for k,v in pairs(aux_table) do
table.insert(merged_table, k)
end
merged_table now contains the lower case version of every word in both input tables.
Now pour that into a function that takes any number of input tables and you are done.
What we did here: we use the lower case version of every word in those tables and store them in a list. aux_table[string.lower("Hello")] will index the same value as aux_table[string.lower("hello")]. So we end up with one entry for each word, even if a word comes in multiple variations.
Using the keys saves us the hassle of comparing strings and distiguishing between unique words and others.
To get a table with all strings from two other tables appearing once (without regard to case), you need something like this:
function merge_case_insensitive(t1,t2)
local ans = {}
for _,v in pairs(t1) do ans[v:lower()] = true end
for _,v in pairs(t2) do ans[v:lower()] = true end
return ans
end
string_collection1 = {"hello","buddy","world","ciao"}
string_collection2 = {"Hello","Buddy","holly","Bye", "bYe"}
merged_string_collection = merge_case_insensitive(string_collection1,string_collection2)
for k in pairs(merged_string_collection) do print(k) end
Edit: And in case you want an array result (without adding another iteration)
function merge_case_insensitive(t1,t2)
local ans = {}
local
function add(t)
for _,v in pairs(t) do
v = v:lower()
if ans[v] == nil then ans[#ans+1] = v end
ans[v] = true
end
end
add(t1)
add(t2)
return ans
end
string_collection1 = {"hello","buddy","world","ciao"}
string_collection2 = {"Hello","Buddy","holly","Bye", "bYe"}
merged_string_collection = merge_case_insensitive(string_collection1,string_collection2)
for _,v in ipairs(merged_string_collection) do print(v) end
We can do this by simply iterations over both tables, and storing a temporary dictionary for checking what words we have already found, and if not there yet, putting them in our new array:
function Merge(t1, t2)
local found = {} --Temporary dictionary
local new = {} --New array
local low --Value to store low versions of words in later
for i,v in ipairs(t1) do --Begin iterating over table one
low = v:lower()
if not found[low] then --If not found yet
new[#new+1] = low --Put it in the new table
found[low] = true --Add it to found
end
end
for i,v in ipairs(t2) do --Repeat with table 2
low = v:lower()
if not found[low] then
new[#new+1] = low
found[low] = true
end
end
return new --Return the new array
end
This method eliminates the need for a third iteration, like in Piglet's answer, and doesn't keep redefining a function and closure and calling them like in tonypdmtr's answer.
I'm trying to build a script for a MUD I play that will create a table to keep track of average xp for each mob. I'm having trouble with the syntax of checking whether an element in a table exists and if not creating it. I tried something like this but keep getting: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value)
mobz_buried = {
{mob = "troll", quantity = 2}
{mob = "warrior", quantity = 1}
{mob = "wizard", quantity = 1}} -- sample data
number_of_mobz_buried = 4
xp_from_bury = 2000 -- another script generates these values, these are all just examples
xp_per_corpse = xp_from_bury / number_of_mobz_buried
for _, v in ipairs(mobz_buried) do
if type(mobz[v].kc) == "variable" then -- kc for 'kill count', number of times killed
mobz[v].kc = mobz[v].kc + 1 -- if it exists increment kc
else
mobz[v].kc = 1 -- if it doesn't exist create a key value that matches the mobs name and make the kc 1
end
if type(mobz[v].xp) == "variable" then -- xp for average experience points
mobz[v].xp = (((mobz[v].kc - 1) * mobz[v].xp + xp_per_corpse)/mobz[v].kc) -- just my formula to find the average xp over a range of differant buries
else
mobz[v].xp = xp_per_corpse -- if it doesn't exist create the table just like before
end
end
I'm trying to end up with mobz.troll = {kc, xp}, mobz.warrior = {kc, xp}, mobz.wizard = {kc, xp} and the ability to add more key values based off of the names mobz_buried gives me.
Based on extra info from your comments, it sounds like you didn't construct a table for mobz. Try this:
local mobz = {}
for _, v in ipairs(mobz_buried) do
mobz[v.mob] = mobz[v.mob] or {}
mobz[v.mob].kc = (mobz[v.mob].kc or 0) + 1
-- etc...
end
I was on stack a few days back for help inserting records to prevent duplicates. However the process to enter these is slow and they slip in.
I have a user base of about 10,000 players, and they have duplicate entries.. I've been trying to filter out these duplicates without success. The examples on stack have no panned out for me.
Here is a clip from my table
[18] =
{
["soldAmount"] = 25,
["buyer"] = [[#playername]],
["timestampz"] = 1398004426,
["secsSinceEvent"] = 55051,
["guildName"] = [[TradingGuild]],
["eventType"] = 15,
["seller"] = [[#myname]],
},
[19] =
{
["soldAmount"] = 25,
["buyer"] = [[#playername]],
["timestampz"] = 1398004426,
["secsSinceEvent"] = 55051,
["guildName"] = [[TradingGuild]],
["eventType"] = 15,
["seller"] = [[#myname]],
},
The timestamp's match and they should not have been added.
for k,v in pairs(sellHistory) do mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales[k] = v
if mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales.timestampz ~= sellHistory.timestampz then
table.insert(mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales, sellHistory)
end end
Now, I need to find out how to remove the current duplicates, and here is what I've tried.
function table_unique(tt)
local newtable = {}
for ii,xx in ipairs(tt) do
if table_count(newtable.timestampz, xx) ~= tt.timestampz then
newtable[#newtable+1] = xx
end
end
return newtable
end
I hope this information provided was clean and understandable.
Thanks!
UPDATE
Attempt #20 ;)
for k,v in pairs(mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales) do
if v == mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales.timestampz then
table.remove(mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales,k)
end
end
No luck yet.
UPDATE
This has worked
for k,v in pairs(mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales) do mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales[k] = v
if v.timestampz == mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales.timestampz then
table.remove(mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales, k)
end
end
IS this a good approach?
Assuming that mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales[18] and mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales[19] are the tables you listed in your post, then to remove all duplicates based on same time stamp it is easiest to create a "set" based on timestamp (since the timestamp is your condition for uniqueness). Loop through your mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales and for each item, add item to new table only if its timestamp not already in set:
function removeDuplicates(tbl)
local timestamps = {}
local newTable = {}
for index, record in ipairs(tbl) do
if timestamps[record.timestampz] == nil then
timestamps[record.timestampz] = 1
table.insert(newTable, record)
end
end
return newTable
end
mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales = removeDuplicates(mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales)
Update based on Question Update:
My comment on following proposed solution:
for k,v in pairs(mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales) do
mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales[k] = v
if v.timestampz == mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales.timestampz then
table.remove(mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales, k)
end
end
The problem is that I don't see how that can work. When you do for k,v in pairs(mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales) do then v is mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales[k] so the next line mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales[k] = v does nothing. Then if v.timestampz == mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales.timestampz compares the timestamp of v, i.e. of mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales[k], with value of a timestampz field in mSavedTHVars.Forever_Sales. But latter is a table without such field, so right-hand-side of == will be nil, so the condition will only be true if v.timestampz is nil, which I don't think is ever the case.
The main reason that I used a solution of creating new table instead of removing duplicates from the existing table is that you can edit a table while iterating over it with pairs or ipairs. If you were to use a reverse counter, it would probably be ok (but I have not tested, test to be sure):
function removeDuplicates(tbl)
local timestamps = {}
local numItems = #tbl
for index=numItems, 1, -1, do
local record = tbl[index]
if timestamps[record.timestampz] ~= nil then
table.remove(newTable, index)
end
timestamps[record.timestampz] = 1
end
end
Also I think the intent of the function is not as clear, but maybe this is just personal preference.
I need a piece of code in lua language that can find sequential items in an array that the number of item in the group exceeds a specific nubmer. Example:if I have the array(the numbers won't be in the right order, randomly distributed)->( 2,5,9,10,11,21,23,15,14,12,22,13,24 ) ; there are two sequential groups (9,10,11,12,13,14,15) and (21,22,23,24 ) . I want the first group to be found if the specific number say (4) or more, or I can get the two groups if the number is (3) or less for example.
thanks
The logical way would seem to be to reorder the table and look for gaps in the sequences.
function table.copy(t)
local t2 = {}
for k,v in pairs(t) do
t2[k] = v
end
return t2
end
function groups(org, cnt)
-- Returns a table containing tables containing the groups found
local res = {}
local group = {}
tbl = table.copy(org) -- Prevent reordering of Original Table
table.sort(tbl)
local last = nil
for _,val in ipairs(tbl) do
if last and last + 1 ~= val then
if #group >= cnt then
table.insert(res,group)
end
group = {}
end
table.insert(group,val)
last = val
end
if #group >= cnt then
table.insert(res,group)
end
return res
end
local org = { 2,5,9,10,11,21,23,15,14,12,22,13,24 }
local result = groups(org,3)
print('Number of Groups',#result)
I'm attempting to compare two tables of equal length with a function, since I don't know of any other way to do so. However, with the following function, it fails to register, and I've no clue why. I'm hoping someone can provide insight to this problem or has a better way of comparing the two tables.
The tables are being populated with the following code:
str = "parameters determined by program (all digits)"
tableone = {}
for word in str:gmatch("%d") do table.insert(tableone,word) end
It's identical for both tables, except, of course, the individual table names. The tables are being populated properly, and display properly when I print them. Here are two tables for the sake of this question:
tableone = {}
tabletwo = {}
for i=1,4 do table.insert(tableone, i) end
for i=1,4 do table.insert(tabletwo, i) end
Obviously, these two tables are going to be equal to each other. The function I wrote to compare the index tables is as follows:
function comparetables(t1, t2)
matchct = 0
for i=1,#t1 do
if t1[i] == t2[i] then
matchct = matchct + 1
end
if matchct == #t1 then
return true
end
end
I tried doing
print(comparetables(tableone,tabletwo))
to see if it'll print "true" but no luck. To me, it seems like it should work without a problem. Yet it doesn't. What am I missing? I've tried searching for something like a table.compare function that someone may have already written, but no such luck in finding one. Thanks for any suggestions!
Additional information:
The reason I'm comparing tables is for a mastermaind-type game. That means the following three rules must apply when comparing tables. The function I created was to just get me started, thinking I could work from there.
When comparing the tables, if the numbers match, Ccount increases by 1.
When comparing tables, if the value exists in a different index position, increment Pcount by 1
For example, with a table of values {1, 3, 3, 4} and a guess of {4, 4, 3, 1}, it would return Pcount of 2 (the one 4 and the 1) and a Ccount of 1 (the three in the third position). I think one of the hardest parts is going to be getting the comparison to recognize that the second 4 in the guess should not increment the Pcount at all.
A slight variant on your code that should work is:
function comparetables(t1, t2)
if #t1 ~= #t2 then return false end
for i=1,#t1 do
if t1[i] ~= t2[i] then return false end
end
return true
end
However I use something more like this: It checks the types of the arguments, their metatables, and a few other cases.
-- This is not clever enough to find matching table keys
-- i.e. this will return false
-- recursive_compare( { [{}]:1 }, { [{}]:1 } )
-- but this is unusual enough for me not to care ;)
-- It can also get stuck in infinite loops if you use it on
-- an evil table like this:
-- t = {}
-- t[1] = t
function recursive_compare(t1,t2)
-- Use usual comparison first.
if t1==t2 then return true end
-- We only support non-default behavior for tables
if (type(t1)~="table") then return false end
-- They better have the same metatables
local mt1 = getmetatable(t1)
local mt2 = getmetatable(t2)
if( not recursive_compare(mt1,mt2) ) then return false end
-- Check each key-value pair
-- We have to do this both ways in case we miss some.
-- TODO: Could probably be smarter and not check those we've
-- already checked though!
for k1,v1 in pairs(t1) do
local v2 = t2[k1]
if( not recursive_compare(v1,v2) ) then return false end
end
for k2,v2 in pairs(t2) do
local v1 = t1[k2]
if( not recursive_compare(v1,v2) ) then return false end
end
return true
end
Here's an example of it in use:
print( recursive_compare( {1,2,3,{1,2,1}}, {1,2,3,{1,2,1}} ) ) -- prints true
print( recursive_compare( {1,2,3,{1,2,1}}, {2,2,3,{1,2,3}} ) ) -- prints false
If you're comparing objects that are more objecty than tabley in an Object oriented sense, then I'd look at implementing the functions in the lua OO way.
Something like this should do the trick:
GameState = {}
GameState.mt = {}
GameState.mt.fns = {}
GameState.mt.__index = GameState.mt.fns
function GameState.new(a,b,c,d)
-- TODO: put argument checks here...
local retval = {}
retval[1] = a
retval[2] = b
retval[3] = c
retval[4] = d
setmetatable(retval, GameState.mt)
return retval
end
function GameState.mt.fns.print( self )
print(" GameState: ", self[1], self[2], self[3], self[4] )
end
function GameState.mt.__tostring( self )
return "GameState: "..self[1].." "..self[2].." "..self[3].." "..self[4]
end
function GameState.mt.__eq(self, other)
-- Check it's actually a GameState, and all its bits match
return getmetatable(other)==GameState.mt and
(self[1] == other[1]) and
(self[2] == other[2]) and
(self[3] == other[3]) and
(self[4] == other[4])
end
Then you'd use it like this:
state1 = GameState.new(1,2,3,4)
state2 = GameState.new(1,2,3,4)
print("State 1 is:")
state1:print()
print("State 2 is:")
print(state2)
print( "state1 == state2 : ", state1 == state2 )
print( "Changing state 2")
state2[1]=2
print( "state1 == state2 : ", state1 == state2 )