I am working on a number of Rails-based projects which require spreadsheet-like functionality, so I would like to know if anyone ever tried to implement the Natural Order Recalculation algorithm in Ruby. If not, could you point out where can I find any guidelines so I can implement if myself. Oh, if anyone is interested, we will also open-source this part of our system :D
Best regards!
The term "natural ordering" in spreadsheets is a special case of a more general idea called topological sorting, in which a set of objects with dependencies are sorted in a way such that each object is processed only after the objects on which it depends. On this topic, I managed to find a few Ruby pages that describe topological sorting; this one might be a good starting point. Although this isn't exactly what you need, the fact that there appears to be some kind of library support may make your job substantially easier.
Hope this helps!
Related
I am trying to implement synonym searching in the Examine search engine that comes with Umbraco 8 out of the box.
Does anyone have any experience with implementing synonym searching in Examine/Umbraco 8. The options that I have been considering after looking around are -
A package that can be installed in Umbraco 8 that offers this extended functionality (if one exists).
Implementing a custom index (currently just using the out of the box 'ExternalIndex') that somehow implements synonym searching in the analysis (via custom analyzer implementation etc - If that is even possible).
Manually formatting multiple search terms by checking for synonyms in the string beforehand, running all searches and consolidating the results after (really a nasty, last resort option - you don't have to tell me how bad this is, I already know).
I have been trawling around the forums for a definitive answer on this and cannot really find one. Essentially I want to stick with the Examine engine for simplicity, however I am starting to think that the best way to achieve what I am after would be to move to a new engine completely (elastic search for example).
Many thanks in advance.
Use algolia? It's free and will do what you need easily? https://www.algolia.com/
The Examine is based on something called the Lucene search index. Lucene is known to not really do synonyms I'm afraid (read why here and potential solution).
Your thinking is probably correct. Examine is good at what it does, if you want to use more advanced searching then you will be better off using a more advanced search provider. There are loads of options, Algolia is Saas and comes with a free plan depending on your usage. It's easy to install and you target data from the front-end.
YOu could also look into Azure Cognitive Search or Solr. These are probably harder to implement but will also do the job
I was wondering if this approach using "observe" still is the recommended approach to achieve joins between two collections.
Meteor and DBRefs
Thanks,
Vindberg.
During the first meteor meetup I asked one of the core developers this very question. The answer was, unfortunately, yes. Using observe is currently the only way to achieve a join, however I was told a solution to this will be added prior to 1.0. I wish I had more information than that. Personally I think the lack of built-in joins is one of meteor's biggest missing features, but I don't see people making a lot of noise about it.
Is there a Rails 3 model versioning plugin that supports point-in-time queries (not just recovery) in an SQL database?
To be concrete: I have a table, documents. I want to be able to say, "as of 9/17/2010, which documents contained the text 'foo'?". This requirement seems to rule out all of the single-table versioning solutions like vestal_versions, and none of the other ones seem to have this feature either. All of the plugins I've looked at are documented as black boxes, so perhaps they store enough data internally to do this sort of query but you would never know it from the docs. In terms of Slowly Changing Dimensions, Type 2 is probably the sort of solution I'm looking for, although ultimately I'll use whatever works.
I also need to keep track of which user made changes, although that's probably possible to do outside of the versioning system too.
Is there one that I'm missing? Or am I using the wrong search term? Or do I get to roll my own?
I think you get to roll your own. If you really need to be able to perform queries on the versions, then the versions should probably be their own model, and making a versioning gem bend to fit your needs will be more painful than doing it yourself.
Sorry, and have fun :/
At one point while traveling the web, I came across a great page which contrasted the clarity and terseness of different methods of doing a sequence of operations without having to make a bunch of throwaway variables, e.g., Var1, Var2, Var3. It tried list comprehensions, folds, maps, etc. For some reason, now matter what I google, I can't find it again. Anyone have any idea what I'm talking about? Or want to explore the topic anyway?
Your question doesn't make much sense.
List comprehensions, fold, and map aren't for avoiding variables (nor are they interchangeable), they're the right ways to process data depending on what you're trying to do.
This is the article you were looking for:
http://erlanganswers.com/web/mcedemo/VersionedVariables.html
It is probably more of an art than a science. In a nutshell my advice is to lean away from using throw-aways as a general habit, but equally, do not be afraid of using them intelligently and sparingly where you feel appropriate or necessary.
When you are starting to learn then by all means use throw-away variables if it helps you break things down into understandable chunks. But try to break away from that sooner rather than later, as using throw-aways may at times make your code harder to maintain and modify. On the other hand, even when you are experienced you may sometimes find that it is worth using throwaways for the same reason : keep things readable and manageable for less experienced programmers. Purists may say that you should never use them, but I believe that when you consider the lifetime costs of software maintenance it is important to remember that readability is very important. Maybe this argument doesn't apply if you are lucky enough to work in an environment that only hires the best of the best, but for the rest of us that's simply not a reflection of the real world.
The bottom line : what is "right" depends on your skill level, the skill level of your peers, what you are doing, and the likely volatility, complexity, and lifetime of the code. Use your best judgement.
In response to the answer saying the question doesn't make sense, you would certainly think it made sense if you saw the article to which I'm referring. The point is to elegantly process a series of statements without redundant intermediate variables. Zed is right on target. I really wish I could find the original link because it was super detailed and went through 5 or 6 methods, some of which were referenced from the erlang mailing list, and weighed the pros and cons of each.
What would be an intelligent way to store text, so that it can be intelligently parsed and translated later on.
For example, The employee is outstanding as he can identify his own strengths and weaknesses and is comfortable with himself.
The above could be the generic text which is shown to the user prior to evaluation. If the user is a Male (say Shaun) or female (say Mary), the above text should be translated as follows.
Mary is outstanding as she can identify her own strengths and weaknesses and is comfortable with herself.
Shaun is outstanding as he can identify his own strengths and weaknesses and is comfortable with himself.
How do we store the evaluation criteria in the first place with appropriate place or token holders. (In the above case employee should be translated to employee name and based on his gender the words he or she, himself or herself needs to be translated)
Is there a mechanism to automatically translate the text with the above information.
The basic idea of doing something like this is called Mail Merge.
This page seems to discus how to implement something like this in Ruby.
[Edit]
A google search gave me this - http://freemarker.org/
I don't know much about this library, but it looks like what you need.
This is a very broad question in the field of Natural Language Processing. There are numerous ways to go around it, the questions you asked seem too broad.
If I understand correctly part of your question this could be done this way :
#variable{name} is outstanding as #gender{he/she} can identify #gender{his/hers} own strengths and weaknesses and is comfortable with #gender{himself/herself}.
Or:
#name is outstanding as #he can identify #his own strengths and weaknesses and is comfortable with #himself.
... if gender is the major problem.
I have had some experience working with a tool called Grammatica, when building a custom user input excel like formula parsing and evaluation engine. It may not be to the level of sophistication you're looking for but it's a start. This basically uses many of the same concepts that popular code compiler parsers employ. It's definitely worth checking out.
I agree with Kornel, this question is too broad. What you seem to be talking about is semantics for which RDF's and OWL can be a good starting point. Read about modeling semantics using markup and you can work your way up from there.