In a rails 3.2 , ruby 1.9.3 app
Trying to perform a simple -1 action on an integer:
doing this on the model:
order_details[:quantity].to_i - 1
and getting the ArgumentError: invalid radix -1
Tried to look this up online , and found very little documentation.
Any help, pls?
I'm assuming order_details[:quantity] is a String (though the answer is the same regardless).
String#to_i takes an optional argument for the base the number is to be interpreted as. For instance "10101".to_i(2) will parse as base 2, (giving the decimal 21 as a result). Your line of code is being interpreted as
order_details[:quantity].to_i(-1)
and since a base of negative one (-1) makes no sense, it's giving you that error. The solution is to put parentheses around order_details[:quantity].to_i so that it's evaluated first:
(order_details[:quantity].to_i) - 1
Edit:
Or, make sure there's a space separating - from the two arguments (or no spaces on either side) and Ruby should parse it correctly. It might be that your actual code is written as order_details[:quantity].to_i -1 (note no space between - and 1) causing it to read -1 and then pass it as an argument to to_i.
I think your problem is that your code really looks like this:
order_details[:quantity].to_i -1 # with the minus sign right next to the one
Ruby is parsing this as:
order_details[:quantity].to_i(-1)
Method parameters do not (always) need to be wrapped in parenthesis in Ruby, and to_i takes a parameter that specifies the base in which you are counting.
So you could convert base 16 into our normal base ten like:
"0xA".to_i(16)
iamnotmaynard correctly identified it as a syntax error, but I think it's that you need to separate the - and 1. You could put parenthesis around the first element (it works), but that's more short-circuiting improper syntax instead of supplying proper syntax.
Try separating the elements out without parenthesis:
order_details[:quantity].to_i - 1 # with the space between the 1 and minus sign
Related
If I have a search: (\d\d):(\d\d) and I want to add an extra 0 to the numbers that I find (ie, 12:30 would become 120:130), how do I prevent the 0 being interpreted as \10 and \20:
\10:\20
I tried escaping it with \ but that just made more backreferences. Is there another way to escape in grep?
In your original post, you didn't mention that you're using these backreferences in the replacement pattern, not the search pattern. You also didn't mention that you're using BBEdit. Solving your problem requires both of those facts.
From page 209 of the BBEdit manual:
\NNN+
If more than two decimal digits follow the backslash, only the first two are considered part of the backreference. Thus, “\111” would be interpreted as the 11th backreference, followed by a literal “1”. You may use a leading zero; for example, if in your replacement pattern you want the first backreference followed by a literal “1”, you can use “\011”. (If you use “\11”, you will get the 11th backreference, even if it is empty.)
Therefore you should try this replacement pattern:
\010:\020
I've been looking for a good way to see if a string of items are all numbers, and thought there might be a way of specifying a range from 0 to 9 and seeing if they're included in the string, but all that I've looked up online has really confused me.
def validate_pin(pin)
(pin.length == 4 || pin.length == 6) && pin.count("0-9") == pin.length
end
The code above is someone else's work and I've been trying to identify how it works. It's a pin checker - takes in a set of characters and ensures the string is either 4 or 6 digits and all numbers - but how does the range work?
When I did this problem I tried to use to_a? Integer and a bunch of other things including ranges such as (0..9) and ("0..9) and ("0".."9") to validate a character is an integer. When I saw ("0-9) it confused the heck out of me, and half an hour of googling and youtube has only left me with regex tutorials (which I'm interested in, but currently just trying to get the basics down)
So to sum this up, my goal is to understand a more semantic/concise way to identify if a character is an integer. Whatever is the simplest way. All and any feedback is welcome. I am a new rubyist and trying to get down my fundamentals. Thank You.
Regex really is the right way to do this. It's specifically for testing patterns in strings. This is how you'd test "do all characters in this string fall in the range of characters 0-9?":
pin.match(/\A[0-9]+\z/)
This regex says "Does this string start and end with at least one of the characters 0-9, with nothing else in between?" - the \A and \z are start-of-string and end-of-string matchers, and the [0-9]+ matches any one or more of any character in that range.
You could even do your entire check in one line of regex:
pin.match(/\A([0-9]{4}|[0-9]{6})\z/)
Which says "Does this string consist of the characters 0-9 repeated exactly 4 times, or the characters 0-9, repeated exactly 6 times?"
Ruby's String#count method does something similar to this, though it just counts the number of occurrences of the characters passed, and it uses something similar to regex ranges to allow you to specify character ranges.
The sequence c1-c2 means all characters between c1 and c2.
Thus, it expands the parameter "0-9" into the list of characters "0123456789", and then it tests how many of the characters in the string match that list of characters.
This will work to verify that a certain number of numbers exist in the string, and the length checks let you implicitly test that no other characters exist in the string. However, regexes let you assert that directly, by ensuring that the whole string matches a given pattern, including length constraints.
Count everything non-digit in pin and check if this count is zero:
pin.count("^0-9").zero?
Since you seem to be looking for answers outside regex and since Chris already spelled out how the count method was being implemented in the example above, I'll try to add one more idea for testing whether a string is an Integer or not:
pin.to_i.to_s == pin
What we're doing is converting the string to an integer, converting that result back to a string, and then testing to see if anything changed during the process. If the result is =>true, then you know nothing changed during the conversion to an integer and therefore the string is only an Integer.
EDIT:
The example above only works if the entire string is an Integer and won’t properly deal with leading zeros. If you want to check to make sure each and every character is an Integer then do something like this instead:
pin.prepend(“1”).to_i.to_s(1..-1) == pin
Part of the question seems to be exactly HOW the following portion of code is doing its job:
pin.count("0-9")
This piece of the code is simply returning a count of how many instances of the numbers 0 through 9 exist in the string. That's only one piece of the relevant section of code though. You need to look at the rest of the line to make sense of it:
pin.count("0-9") == pin.length
The first part counts how many instances then the second part compares that to the length of the string. If they are equal (==) then that means every character in the string is an Integer.
Sometimes negation can be used to advantage:
!pin.match?(/\D/) && [4,6].include?(pin.length)
pin.match?(/\D/) returns true if the string contains a character other than a digit (matching /\D/), in which case it it would be negated to false.
One advantage of using negation here is that if the string contains a character other than a digit pin.match?(/\D/) would return true as soon as a non-digit is found, as opposed to methods that examine all the characters in the string.
Groovy supports / as a division operator:
groovy> 1 / 2
===> 0.5
It supports / as a string delimiter, which can even be multiline:
groovy> x = /foo/
===> foo
groovy:000> x = /foo
groovy:001> bar/
===> foo
bar
Given this, why can't I evaluate a slashy-string literal in groovysh?
groovy:000> /foo/
groovy:001>
clearly groovysh thinks this is unterminated for some reason.
How does groovy avoid getting confused between division and strings? What does this code mean:
groovy> f / 2
Is this a function call f(/2 .../) where / is beginning a multiline slashy-string, or f divided by 2?
How does Groovy distinguish division from strings?
I'm not entirely sure how Groovy does it, but I'll describe how I'd do it, and I'd be very surprised if Groovy didn't work in a similar way.
Most parsing algorithms I've heard of (Shunting-yard, Pratt, etc) recognize two distinct kinds of tokens:
Those that expect to be preceded by an expression (infix operators, postfix operators, closing parentheses, etc). If one of these is not preceded by an expression, it's a syntax error.
Those that do not expect to be preceded by an expression (prefix operators, opening parentheses, identifiers, literals, etc). If one of these is preceded by an expression, it's a syntax error.
To make things easier, from this point onward I'm going to refer to the former kind of token as an operator and the latter as a non-operator.
Now, the interesting thing about this distinction is that it's made not based on what the token actually is, but rather on the immediate context, particularly the preceding tokens. Because of this, the same token can be interpreted very differently depending on its position in the code, and whether the parser classifies it as an operator or a non-operator. For example, the '-' token, if in an operator position, denotes a subtraction, but the same token in a non-operator position is a negation. There is no issue deciding whether a '-' is a subtraction operator or not, because you can tell based on its context.
The same is, in general, true for the '/' character in Groovy. If preceded by an expression, it's interpreted as an operator, which means it's a division. Otherwise, it's a non-operator, which makes it a string literal. So, you can generally tell if a '/' is a division or not, by looking at the token that immediately precedes it:
The '/' is a division if it follows an identifier, literal, postfix operator, closing parenthesis, or other token that denotes the end of an expression.
The '/' begins a string if it follows a prefix operator, infix operator, opening parenthesis, or other such token, or if it begins a line.
Of course, it isn't quite so simple in practice. Groovy is designed to be flexible in the face of various styles and uses, and therefore things like semicolons or parentheses are often optional. This can make parsing somewhat ambiguous at times. For example, say our parser comes across the following line:
println / foo
This is most likely an attempt to print a multiline string: foo is the beginning of a string being passed to println as an argument, and the optional parentheses around the argument list are left out. Of course, to a simple parser it looks like a division. I expect the Groovy parser can tell the difference by reading ahead to the following lines to see which interpretation does not give an error, but for something like groovysh that is literally impossible (since, as a repl, it doesn't yet have access to more lines), so it's forced to just guess.
Why can't I evaluate a slashy-string literal in groovysh?
As before, I don't know the exact reason, but I do know that because groovysh is a repl, it's bound to have more trouble with the more ambiguous rules. Even so, a simple single-line slashy-string is pretty unambiguous, so I believe something else may be going on here. Here is the result of me playing with various forms in groovysh:
> /foo - unexpected char: '/' # line 2, column 1.
> /foo/ - awaits further input
> /foo/bar - unexpected char: '/' # line 2, column 1.
> /foo/bar/ - awaits further input
> /foo/ + 'bar' - unexpected char: '/' # line 2, column 1.
> 'foo' + /bar/ - evaluates to 'foobar'
> /foo/ - evaluates to 'foo'
> /foo - awaits further input
> /foo/bar - Unknown property: bar
It appears that something strange happens when a '/' character is the first character in a line. The pattern it appears to follow (as far as I can tell) is this:
A slash as the first character of a line begins a strange parsing mode.
In this mode, every line that ends with a slash followed by nothing but whitespace causes the repl to await further lines.
On the first line that ends with something other than a slash (or whitespace following a slash), the error unexpected char: '/' # line 2, column 1. is printed.
I've also noticed a couple of interesting points regarding this:
Both forward slashes (/) and backslashes (\) appear to count, and seem to be completely interchangeable, in this special mode.
This does not appear to happen at all in groovyConsole or in actual Groovy files.
Putting any whitespace before the opening slash character causes groovysh to interpret it correctly, but only if the opening slash is a forward slash, not a backslash.
So, I personally expect that this is just a quirk of groovysh, either a bug or some under-documented feature I haven't heard about.
I use lua to make some complex job to prepare arguments for macros in Tex/LaTex.
Part I
Here is a stupid minimal example :
\newcommand{\test}{\luaexec{tex.print("11,12")}}% aim to create 11,12
\def\compare#1,#2.{\ifthenelse{#1<#2}{less}{more}}
\string\compare11,12. : \compare11,12.\\ %answer is less
\string\test : \test\\ % answer is 11,12
\string\compare : \compare\test. % generate an error
The last line creates an error. Obviously, Tex did not detect the "," included in \test.
How can I do so that \test is understood as 11 followed by , followed by 12 and not the string 11,12 and finally used as a correctly formed argument for \compare ?
There are several misunderstandings of how TeX works.
Your \compare macro wants to find something followed by a comma, then something followed by a period. However when you call
\compare\test
no comma is found, so TeX keeps looking for it until finding either the end of file or a \par (or a blank line as well). Note that TeX never expands macros when looking for the arguments to a macro.
You might do
\expandafter\compare\test.
provided that \test immediately expands to tokens in the required format, which however don't, because the expansion of \test is
\luaexec{tex.print("11,12")}
and the comma is hidden by the braces, so it doesn't count. But it wouldn't help nonetheless.
The problem is the same: when you do
\newcommand{\test}{\luaexec{tex.print("11,12")}}
the argument is not expanded. You might use “expanded definition” with \edef, but the problem is that \luaexec is not fully expandable.
If you do
\edef\test{\directlua{tex.sprint("11,12")}}
then
\expandafter\compare\test.
would work.
I am doing some client side validation in ASP.NET MVC and I found myself trying to do conditional validation on a set of items (ie, if the checkbox is checked then validate and visa versa). This was problematic, to say the least.
To get around this, I figured that I could "cheat" by having a hidden element that would contain all of the information for each set, thus the idea of a CSV string containing this information.
I already use a custom [HiddenRequired] attribute to validate if the hidden input contains a value, with success, but I thought as I will need to validate each piece of data in the csv, that a regular expression would solve this.
My regular expression work is extremely weak and after a good 2 hours I've almost given up.
This is an example of the csv string:
true,3,24,over,0.5
to explain:
true denotes if I should validate the rest. I need to conditionally switch in the regex using this
3 and 24 are integers and will only ever fall in the range 0-24.
over is a string and will either be over or under
0.5 is a decimal value, of unknown precision.
In the validation, all values should be present and at least of the correct type
Is there someone who can either provide such a regex or at least provide some hints, i'm really stuck!
Try this regex:
#"^(true,([01]?\d|2[0-4]),([01]?\d|2[0-4]),(over|under),\d+\.?\d+|false.*)$"
I'll try to explain it using comments. Feel free to ask if anything is unclear. =)
#"
^ # start of line
(
true, # literal true
([01]?\d # Either 0, 1, or nothing followed by a digit
| # or
2[0-4]), # 20 - 24
([01]?\d|2[0-4]), # again
(over|under), # over or under
\d+\.?\d+ # any number of digits, optional dot, any number of digits
| #... OR ...
false.* # false followed by anything
)
$ # end of line
");
I would probably use a Split(',') and validate elements of the resulting array instead of using a regex. Also you should watch out for the \, case (the comma is part of the value).