Lua return index of a nested table - lua

This is my first attempt to use Lua tables and I'm getting on with it quite well. I'm struggling with one thing though, heres (a small sample of) my table as it currently stands:
objects = {
["1/1/1"] = { tl = 1, startVal = 1, stopVal = 0 },
["1/1/2"] = { tl = 11, startVal = 1, stopVal = 0 },
["1/1/3"] = { tl = 22, startVal = 1, stopVal = 0 },
["1/1/4"] = { tl = 33, startVal = 1, stopVal = 0 },
}
The typical operation of this is that I use the "1/1/1" values as a lookup to the inner tables and then use those values in various functions. This all works well. Now, I need to go the other way, say I have tl = 22 coming in, I want to return the top value ("1/1/3" in this case).
I think I need to do something with the inpairs I keep seeing on the web but I'm struggling to implement. Any help would be massively appreciated.

You can't use ipairs because your table is an associated array not a sequence, so you have to use pairs. Also, there is no search function builtin to Lua, so you have to loop over all items yourself, looking for the right field value:
function findTL(tbl)
for key, data in pairs(tbl) do
if data.tl == tlSearch then
return key
end
end
end
local key = findTL(objects, 22)
If you want something a tad more object-oriented you could do this:
objects.findTL = findTL -- ok because first arg is the table to search
local key = objects:findTL(22)

isn't it better to take the value directly?
objects.1/1/1.tl
I don't know if it will work also with slashes, but if not, you may replace it by 'x' for example. Then it will be:
objects.1x1x1.tl

Related

Lua: Concise expression of table scope

I'm working on a game where a bunch of characters will be generated on the fly, based on some constraints defined either in the project or externally via mod files. I am using MoonSharp Lua (5.2) interpreter for interfacing with my C# code, and Lua tables to store the constraint presets. As an example:
require "Defaults"
AgePresets = {}
-- Single value
AgePresets.Newborn = 0
-- Simple ranges
AgePresets.Default = defaultAgeRange --referring to the Defaults require
AgePresets.Child = {1, 12}
AgePresets.Teenager = {13, 19}
AgePresets.YoungAdult = {20, 29}
AgePresets.Adult = {30, 40}
AgePresets.MiddleAge = {40, 60}
AgePresets.Senior = {61, 80}
AgePresets.Elder = {81, 99}
AgePresets.Methuselah = {100, 150}
AgePresets.Methuselah2 = {150, 200}
-- Weighted ranges // again referring to previously defined elements to keep things concise
AgePresets.Tween = {
{weight = 1, minmax = AgePresets.Teenager },
{weight = 1, minmax = AgePresets.YoungAdult }
}
This works fine, but from an end-user point of view, there's a lot of unnecessary typing involved. We are clearly working on AgePresets here but it is still mentioned as a prefix before every member name.
I could of course define AgePresets as an array, like AgePresets = { Child = {}, Teenager = {} } but the problem with that is then I cannot refer to previously defined elements in the array.
This doesn't work:
AgePresets = {
Child = {1,12},
RefToChild = Child, //attempt to index a nil value exception
Teen = {13,19}
}
What I ideally want to achieve is a clean, concise way for users to enter this data in, like in the first example but without having to put AgePresets. prefix before everything. How do I go about declaring a scope in a file such that all succeeding members defined in the file will be within that scope, while maintaining the ability to refer to other members defined previously in the scope?
AgePresets = setmetatable({}, {__index = _G})
do
local _ENV = AgePresets
Newborn = 0
Child = {1,12}
RefToChild = Child -- this ref is Ok
Teen = {13,19}
YoungAdult = {20,29}
Tween = {
{weight = 1, minmax = Teen },
{weight = 1, minmax = YoungAdult }
}
rnd = math.random(10) -- global functions are available here
end
setmetatable(AgePresets, nil)
You can mix the two styles: table constructor for fields that don't need to reference variables that aren't in scope yet, followed by assignment statements for the rest.
I would do that unless the order of the fields in the code significantly enhanced comprehension.

Re-initialize table without losing references

I'd like to re-initialize a table without losing references to it.
What I want to achieve is defining tables in files, and when a file is changed (with a text editor) the file is reloaded, changing the table. Of course this doesn't change the table but creates a new instance, old references will still point to the old table.
Any suggestions?
EDIT: I want to elaborate on what I want to achieve. An example with game characters and weapons. I want to modify the weapons.lua and so affect the characters.
-- weapons.lua
sword = { damage = 3 }
-- characters.lua
character = { weapon = sword }
Adding a level of indirection (putting "sword" inside "weapons") like suggested by JWT doesn't help, unless I split character into { weaponTable = weapons, weaponKey = "sword" } but I don't see this as an option.
Anchor everything that needs to survive in the global environment. Nesting is fine, and this doesn't have to be your primary reference. (You can still local things, but make sure to initialize those local variables from the global environment and update the global if you change the local.)
To initialize the global values, say
foo = foo or value -- if foo is always true-ish
bar = (bar == nil) and value or bar -- if bar may be `false`
To initialize or update tables, you can
foo = foo or { }
foo.bar = foo.bar or 23
foo.baz = foo.baz or 42
-- and so on...
but that's kinda icky, so maybe say
function reinit( new, old ) -- (re)initialize one level, prefer old
if old == nil then return new end
if type( old ) ~= "table" then return old end
for k, v in pairs( new ) do
if old[k] == nil then old[k] = v end
end
return old
end
function reset( new, old ) -- (re)initialize one level, prefer new
if old == nil then return new end
if type( old ) ~= "table" then return new end
for k, v in pairs( new ) do old[k] = v end
return old
end
and then just
foo = reinit( { bar = 23, baz = 42 }, foo ) -- only setting if not defined
-- or
foo = reset( { bar = 23, baz = 42 }, foo ) -- always overriding given fields
or maybe make it even more fancy and say
function traverse( t, path )
local here, last, lastk, created = t
-- follow path of several keys starting from t, creating tables as needed
for k in path:gmatch "[^.]+" do
k = tonumber( k ) or k -- convert all-number keys to integer (for arrays)
local next = here[k]
if not next then
next, created = { }, true
here[k] = next
else
created = false
end
lastk, last, here = k, here, next
end
return here, last, lastk, created
end
function repopulate( path, value, update )
update = update or reinit -- pass 'reset' as 'update' for the other behavior
-- or something entirely different if that's what you need
local here, last, lastk, created = traverse( _G, path )
if type( value ) == "table" then
update( value, here )
else
if created then last[lastk] = nil end -- created one level too much
update( { [lastk] = value }, last )
end
end
and then (with arbitrary nesting)
-- No need to create 'state' first if it doesn't exist yet!
-- (If it exists, it will get updated, otherwise it's created)
repopulate( "state.player.weapon", { kind = "sword", damage = 11 } )
-- Do keep in mind that generally update order is relevant -- you may want to
-- give a newly created player a default inventory, but you may not want to
-- "refill" the player's inventory on every reload. So generally `repopulate`
-- with the parent and all child nodes for from-scratch creation, then
-- `repopulate` the child nodes that need to be checked & potentially updated
-- as well.
-- (So here you'd probably repopulate `state.player` first and then
-- `state.player.weapon` or other fields only if they should be updated anyway.)
-- e.g.:
repopulate( "state.player", {
x = 0, y = 0, hp = 100, mp = 100, level = 0, -- and so on
weapon = { kind = "sword", damage = 11 }, -- etc. etc.
} )
-- on reload always force a sword-kind weapon, leave rest (damage, ...) as-is
repopulate( "state.player.weapon", { kind = "sword" }, reset )
-- or alternatively: only if player has no weapon, give them a sword
repopulate( "state.player.weapon", { kind = "sword", damage = 3 } )
And you can go further, add metamethods to hide some of that shuffling, define different update policies, ... – you've seen some of the possibilities, now go and build your own version that fits your style and your code.
(While you're free to use the above code in any way, please note that it was written ad-hoc in the browser. I did some testing, fixed some glitches, and it seems to work now, but don't be surprised if there's still one or two bugs hiding in there. So play with this, change it, break it (and see how/why it breaks), adapt and extend it, ... – but unless you completely understand what it does and can fix any bugs, I strongly suggest you write your own version, or just stick to the basics. You probably don't need everything that this does, and you're likely to need other things that this doesn't do. As this is a central part of the reloading/live-coding infrastructure and everything has to be adapted to be reload-compatible, any mismatch between your tooling and what you actually need will result in a lot of pain everywhere in your code. So if you need something like this, put in a day or two to make it work the way you need it to, or you will regret it.)
(Free bonus warning: If you do OOP, you'll probably have to store and retrieve your classes instead of creating them every time, otherwise old objects from previous iterations will miss code updates and still run their old methods. I've forgotten about that more than just a couple of times and wasted several hours pondering "why isn't it fixed now?!?" after repeatedly re-loading code... So remember to anchor your metatables, anchor your classes!)
You could nest the tables in another table.
Before:
local a = { 1, 2, 3 }
local b = { 7, 8, 9 }
print(a[2] + b[2]) -- #=> 10
After:
local lookup = {
a = { 1, 2, 3 },
b = { 7, 8, 9 }
}
print(lookup.a[2] + lookup.b[2]) -- #=> 10
Then you can fully replace (or just update) a table in the lookup table and any dependent statements will use that updated value:
lookup.a = { 100, 50, 0 }
print(lookup.a[2] + lookup.b[2]) -- #=> 58
I don't know if it's exactly what you needed (As an ID is necessary) but I hope it will fit your needs.
meta = {
tables = {},
__call = function(arg, t)
for k, v in pairs(t) do
arg[k] = v
end
end,
__bnot = function(arg)
return arg.__key
end,
__newindex = function(arg, key, val)
meta.tables[arg.__key][key] = val
end,
__index = function(arg, key)
return meta.tables[arg.__key][key]
end
}
function RefTable(arg)
local newtable = {}
if arg ~= nil then
newtable.__key = arg
setmetatable(newtable, meta)
if meta.tables[arg] == nil then
meta.tables[arg] = {}
end
else
error("RefTable can't have nil key")
end
return newtable
end
-- Using the RefTable
sword = RefTable("Sword")
sword({damage = 3})
sword.cooldown = 10
character = {sword = sword}
print("base", sword.damage, sword.cooldown)
print("embed", character.sword.damage, character.sword.cooldown)
sword = RefTable("Sword")
sword({damage = 8, cooldown = 50})
print("embed2", character.sword.damage, character.sword.cooldown)
print(sword.__key, sword.cooldown)
ref = RefTable("Sword")
ref.cooldown = 1000
print(sword.cooldown)

Lua and Love2D, table in table error

Why isn't this working? I'm trying to put all my object tables in a single table and use a forloop to iterate through each of them and draw. It shows an error message saying: "}" expected near "=" at line 5
function love.load()
solidstatic = {
ground = {x = 0,y = 160,width = 1000,height = 1000},
box = {x = 80,y = 100,width = 15,height = 15}
}
end
function love.draw()
for i,obj in ipairs(solidstatic) do
love.graphics.rectangle("fill",obj[x],obj[y],obj[width],obj[height])
end
end
(edit) solved the error problem, I was running the wrong .lua file. But still, it doesn't draw anything on the screen
Two things.
Firstly, you must use pairs instead of ipairs to list keys that are not numbers.
for i, v in pairs(table) do
...
end
You must also index the variables as a string.
t = {
x = 1
}
t['x'] = 1
-- or
t.x = 1
This is because doing it without quotes would be indexing with the global variable x, which doesn't exist.
You need to use pairs instead of ipairs to iterate over elements in solidstatic as there are no array keys in that table.

Randomly select a key from a table in Lua

I want to randomly populate a grid in Lua using a list of possible items, which is defined as follows:
-- Items
items = {}
items.glass = {}
items.glass.color = colors.blue
items.brick = {}
items.brick.color = colors.red
items.grass = {}
items.grass.color = colors.green
So the keys of the table are "glass", "brick" and "grass".
How do I randomly select one of these keys if they are not addressable by a numeric index?
Well, I kind of got a workaround, but I would be open to any better suggestions.
The first solution consists of having a secondary table which serves as an index to the first table:
item_index = {"grass", "brick", "glass"}
Then I can randomly store a key of this table (board is a matrix that stores the value of the random entry in item_index):
local index = math.random(1,3)
board[i][j] = item_index[index]
After which I can get details of the original list as follows:
items[board[y][x]].color
The second solution, which I have decided on, involves adding the defined elements as array elements to the original table:
-- Items
items = {}
items.glass = {}
items.glass.color = colors.blue
table.insert(items, items.glass) --- Add item as array item
items.brick = {}
items.brick.color = colors.red
table.insert(items, items.brick) --- Add item as array item
items.grass = {}
items.grass.color = colors.green
table.insert(items, items.grass) --- Add item as array item
Then, I can address the elements directly using an index:
local index = math.random(1,3)
board[i][j] = items[index]
And they can be retrieved directly without the need for an additional lookup:
board[y][x].color
Although your second method gives concise syntax, I think the first is easier to maintain. I can't test here, but I think you can get the best of both, won't this work:
local items = {
glass = {
color = colors.blue,
},
brick = {
color = colors.red,
},
grass = {
color = colors.green,
},
}
local item_index = {"grass", "brick", "glass"}
local index = math.random(1,3)
board[i][j] = items[item_index[index]]
print('color:', board[i][j].color)
If you're table is not too big and you can just break off at a random point. This method assumes that you know the number of entries in the table (which is not equal to #table value, if the table has non-number keys).
So find the length of the table, then break at random(1, length(table)), like so:
local items = {} ....
items.grass.color = colors.green
local numitems = 0 -- find the size of the table
for k,v in pairs(items) do
numitems = numitems + 1
end
local randval = math.random(1, numitems) -- get a random point
local randentry
local count = 0
for k,v in pairs(items) do
count = count + 1
if(count == randentry) then
randentry = {key = k, val = v}
break
end
end
The goods: You don't have to keep track of the keys. It can be any table, you don't need to maintain it.
The bad and ugly: It is O(n) - two linear passes.So, it is not at all ideal if you have big table.
The above answers assume you know what all of the keys are, which isn't something I was able to do earlier today. My solution:
function table.randFrom( t )
local choice = "F"
local n = 0
for i, o in pairs(t) do
n = n + 1
if math.random() < (1/n) then
choice = o
end
end
return choice
end
Explanation: we can't use table.getn( t ) to get the size of the table, so we track it as we go. The first item will have a 1/1=1 chance of being picked; the second 1/2 = 0.5, and so on...
If you expand for N items, the Nth item will have a 1/N chance of being chosen. The first item will have a 1 - (1/2) - (1/3) - (1/4) - ... - (1/N) chance of not being replaced (remember, it is always chosen at first). This series converges to 1 - (N-1)/N = 1/N, which is equal to the chance of the last item being chosen.
Thus, each item in the array has an equal likelihood of being chosen; it is uniformly random. This also runs in O(n) time, which isn't great but it's the best you can do if you don't know your index names.

Concatenation of tables in Lua

ORIGINAL POST
Given that there is no built in function in Lua, I am in search of a function that allows me to append tables together. I have googled quite a bit and have tried every solutions I stumbled across but none seem to work properly.
The scenario goes like this: I am using Lua embeded in an application. An internal command of the application returns a list of values in the form of a table.
What I am trying to do is call that command recursively in a loop and append the returned values, again in the form of a table, to the table from previous iterations.
EDIT
For those who come across this post in the future, please note what #gimf posted. Since Tables in Lua are as much like arrays than anything else (even in a list context), there is no real correct way to append one table to another. The closest concept is merging of tables. Please see the post, "Lua - merge tables?" for help in that regard.
Overcomplicated answers much?
Here is my implementation:
function TableConcat(t1,t2)
for i=1,#t2 do
t1[#t1+1] = t2[i]
end
return t1
end
If you want to concatenate an existing table to a new one, this is the most concise way to do it:
local t = {3, 4, 5}
local concatenation = {1, 2, table.unpack(t)}
Although I'm not sure how good this is performance-wise.
And one more way:
for _,v in ipairs(t2) do
table.insert(t1, v)
end
It seems to me the most readable one - it iterates over the 2nd table and appends its values to the 1st one, end of story. Curious how it fares in speed to the explicit indexing [] above
A simple way to do what you want:
local t1 = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}
local t2 = {6, 7, 8, 9, 10}
local t3 = {unpack(t1)}
for I = 1,#t2 do
t3[#t1+I] = t2[I]
end
To add two tables together do this
ii=0
for i=#firsttable, #secondtable+#firsttable do
ii=ii+1
firsttable[i]=secondtable[ii]
end
use the first table as the variable you wanted to add as code adds the second one on to the end of the first table in order.
i is the start number of the table or list.
#secondtable+#firsttable is what to end at.
It starts at the end of the first table you want to add to, and ends at the end of the second table in a for loop so it works with any size table or list.
In general the notion of concatenating arbitrary tables does not make sense in Lua because a single key can only have one value.
There are special cases in which concatenation does make sense. One such is for tables containing simple arrays, which might be the natural result of a function intended to return a list of results.
In that case, you can write:
-- return a new array containing the concatenation of all of its
-- parameters. Scaler parameters are included in place, and array
-- parameters have their values shallow-copied to the final array.
-- Note that userdata and function values are treated as scalar.
function array_concat(...)
local t = {}
for n = 1,select("#",...) do
local arg = select(n,...)
if type(arg)=="table" then
for _,v in ipairs(arg) do
t[#t+1] = v
end
else
t[#t+1] = arg
end
end
return t
end
This is a shallow copy, and makes no attempt to find out if a userdata or function value is a container or object of some kind that might need different treatment.
An alternative implementation might modify the first argument rather than creating a new table. This would save the cost of copying, and make array_concat different from the .. operator on strings.
Edit: As observed in a comment by Joseph Kingry, I failed to properly extract the actual value of each argument from .... I also failed to return the merged table from the function at all. That's what I get for coding in the answer box and not testing the code at all.
If you want to merge two tables, but need a deep copy of the result table, for whatever reason, use the merge from another SO question on merging tables plus some deep copy code from lua-users.
(edit
Well, maybe you can edit your question to provide a minimal example... If you mean that a table
{ a = 1, b = 2 }
concatenated with another table
{ a = 5, b = 10 }
should result in
{ a = 1, b = 2, a = 5, b = 10 }
then you're out of luck. Keys are unique.
It seems you want to have a list of pairs, like { { a, 1 }, { b, 2 }, { a, 5 }, { b, 10 } }. You could also use a final structure like { a = { 1, 5 }, b = { 2, 10 } }, depending on your application.
But the simple of notion of "concatenating" tables does not make sense with Lua tables.
)
Here is an implementation I've done similar to RBerteig's above, but using the hidden parameter arg which is available when a function receives a variable number of arguments. Personally, I think this is more readable vs the select syntax.
function array_concat(...)
local t = {}
for i = 1, arg.n do
local array = arg[i]
if (type(array) == "table") then
for j = 1, #array do
t[#t+1] = array[j]
end
else
t[#t+1] = array
end
end
return t
end
Here is my implementation to concatenate a set of pure-integer-indexing tables, FYI.
define a function to concatenate two tables, concat_2tables
another recursive function concatenateTables: split the table list by unpack, and call concat_2tables to concatenate table1 and restTableList
t1 = {1, 2, 3}
t2 = {4, 5}
t3 = {6}
concat_2tables = function(table1, table2)
len = table.getn(table1)
for key, val in pairs(table2)do
table1[key+len] = val
end
return table1
end
concatenateTables = function( tableList )
if tableList==nil then
return nil
elseif table.getn(tableList) == 1 then
return tableList[1]
else
table1 = tableList[1]
restTableList = {unpack(tableList, 2)}
return concat_2tables(table1, concatenateTables(restTableList))
end
end
tt = {t1, t2, t3}
t = concatenateTables(tt)
-- Lua 5.1+
function TableAppend(t1, t2)
-- A numeric for loop is faster than pairs, but it only gets the sequential part of t2
for i = 1, #t2 do
t1[#t1 + 1] = t2[i] -- this is slightly faster than table.insert
end
-- This loop gets the non-sequential part (e.g. ['a'] = 1), if it exists
local k, v = next(t2, #t2 ~= 0 and #t2 or nil)
while k do
t1[k] = v -- if index k already exists in t1 then it will be overwritten
k, v = next(t2, k)
end
end
EDIT
Here's a better solution, the other one tended to overwrite numeric keys, the usage is still the same:
function merge(...)
local temp = {}
local index = 1
local result = {}
math.randomseed(os.time())
for i, tbl in ipairs({ ... }) do
for k, v in pairs(tbl) do
if type(k) == 'number' then
-- randomize numeric keys
k = math.random() * i * k
end
temp[k] = v
end
end
for k, v in pairs(temp) do
if type(k) == "number" then
-- Sort numeric keys into order
if result[index] then
index = index + 1
end
k = index
end
result[k] = v
end
return result
end
ORIGINAL
A wee bit late to the game, but this seems to work for me:
function concat(...)
local result = {}
for i, tbl in ipairs({...}) do
for k, v in pairs(tbl) do
if type(k) ~= "number" then
result[k] = v
else
result[i] = v
end
end
end
return result
end
It might be a bit overcomplicated, but it takes an infinite amount of arguments, and works for both key-value pairs and regular "arrays" (numbers as keys). Here's an example
I like the simplicity in #Weeve Ferrelaine answer, but mutations may cause many issues and in general, are not desirable.
Version with NO MUTATION.
---#param t1 {}
---#param t2 {}
function TableConcat(t1,t2)
local tOut = {}
for i = 1, #t1 do
tOut[i] = t1[i]
end
for i = #t1, #t1 + #t2 do
tOut[i] = t2[i]
end
return tOut
end
Original implementation, that's mutating t1.
function TableConcat(t1,t2)
for i=1,#t2 do
t1[#t1+1] = t2[i]
end
return t1
end
Use table.concat:
http://lua-users.org/wiki/TableLibraryTutorial
> = table.concat({ 1, 2, "three", 4, "five" })
12three4five
> = table.concat({ 1, 2, "three", 4, "five" }, ", ")
1, 2, three, 4, five
> = table.concat({ 1, 2, "three", 4, "five" }, ", ", 2)
2, three, 4, five
> = table.concat({ 1, 2, "three", 4, "five" }, ", ", 2, 4)
2, three, 4

Resources