Related
Basically, I want readline to recognize cursor keys for me. Their byte identifiers are multi-character, like e.g. \e[D. So hooking up to rl_getc isn't enough. However, I didn't see any variables similar to rl_key_sequence or rl_current_key_seq, etc.…
Is there really no way to get the – one have to say: fully processed and utilized information, i.e.: the multibyte key ID – out of readline?
If I create a named key for use in Google AppEngine, what kind of String is the key-name? Does it use Unicode characters or is it a binary string?
More specifically, if I want to have my key-name made up of 8-bit binary data, is there a way I can do it? If not, can I at least use 7-bit binary data? Or are there any reserved values? Does it use NULL as the End-Of-String marker, for example?
GAE docs do not specify any restrictions on the key-name String. So a String with any content should be valid.
If you want to use a binary data as an identifier, then you should encode it into a String. You can use any of the binary-to-text encoding methods: most used seem to be Base64 (3 bytes = 4 chars) and BinHex (1 byte = 2 chars).
I meanwhile had some time to actually test this out by generating a bunch of keys with binary names and then performing a kind-only query to get all the keys back. Here are the results:
Any binary character is fine. If you create an entity with key name "\x00\x13\x127\x255", a query will find this entity and its key name will return that same string
The AppEngine Dashboard, Database Viewer, and other tools will simply omit characters that aren't displayable, so the key names "\x00test" and \x00\x00test will both show up as separate entities, but their keys are both shown as "test"
I have not tested all available AppEngine tools, just some of the basics in the Console, so there may be other tools that get confused by such keys...
Keys are UTF-8 encoded, so any character between 128 and 255 takes up 2 bytes of storage
From this, I would derive the following recommendations:
If you need to be able to work with individual entities from the AppEngine console and need to identify them by key, you are limited to printable characters and thus need to encode the binary key name into a String either in Base16 (hex; 50% overhead), Base64 (33% overhead), or Base85 (25% overhead)
If you don't care about key readability, but need to pack as much data as possible into the key name with minimal storage use, use Base128 encoding (i.e. 7-bits only; 14% overhead) to avoid the implicit UTF-8 encoding (50% overhead!) of 8-bit data data
Asides:
I will accept #PeterKnego's answer instead of this one since this one basically only confirms and expands on what he already assumed correctly.
From looking through the source code of the Java API, I think that the UTF-8 encoding of the key-name happens in the API (while building the protocol buffer) rather than in BigTable, so if you really want to go nuts on storage space maximization, it may be possible to build your own protocol buffers and store full 8-bit data without overhead. But this is probably asking for trouble...
I have a requirement to adapt an existing, non-unicode, c project to display Chinese characters. As there is a short deadline, and I'm new(ish) to C and encoding I've gone down the route of changing the sytem locale to Simplified Chinese PRC in order to support display of Chinese text in the gui application. This has in turn changed the encoding (in visual studio 2010) in the project to Chinese Simplified (GB2312).
Everything works except that special characters, eg: degree sign, superscript 2, etc are displayed as question marks. I believe this is because we used to pass \260 i.e. the octal value of the degree symbol in the ascii table, and this no longer equates to anything in the gb2312 table.
The workflow for displaying a degree symbol in a keypad was as follows:
display_function( data, '\260' ); //Pass the octal value of the degree symbol to the keypad
This display_function is used to translate the integer inputs into strings for display on the keypad:
data->[ pos ] = (char) ch;
Essentially I need to get this (and other special chars) to display correctly. Is there a way to pass this symbol using the current setup?
According to the char list for gb23212 the symbol is supported so my current thinking is to work out the octal value of the symbol and keep the existing functions as they are. These currently pass the values around as chars. Using the table below:
http://ash.jp/code/cn/gb2312tbl.htm.
and the following formula to obtain the octal value:
octal number associated with the row, multiplied by 10 and added to the octal number associated with the column.
I believe this would be A1E0 x 10 + 3 = 414403.
However, when I try and pass this to display_function I get "error C2022: '268' : too big for character".
Am I going about this wrong? I'd prefer not to change the existing functions as they are in widespread use, but do I need to change the function to use a wide char?
Apologies if the above is convoluted and filled with incorrect assumptions! I've been trying to get my head round this for a week or two and encodings, char sets and locales just seem to get more and more confusing!
thanks in advance
If current functions support only 8-bits characters, and you need to use them to display 16-bits characters, then probably your guess is correct - you may have to change functions to use something like "wchar" instead of "char".
Maybe also duplicate them with other name to provide compatibility for other users in case these functions are used in other projects.
But if it's only one project, then maybe you will want to check possibility to replace "char" by "wchar" in almost all places of the project.
From first glance, it would appear I have two basic choices for storing ZIP codes in a database table:
Text (probably most common), i.e. char(5) or varchar(9) to support +4 extension
Numeric, i.e. 32-bit integer
Both would satisfy the requirements of the data, if we assume that there are no international concerns. In the past we've generally just gone the text route, but I was wondering if anyone does the opposite? Just from brief comparison it looks like the integer method has two clear advantages:
It is, by means of its nature, automatically limited to numerics only (whereas without validation the text style could store letters and such which are not, to my knowledge, ever valid in a ZIP code). This doesn't mean we could/would/should forgo validating user input as normal, though!
It takes less space, being 4 bytes (which should be plenty even for 9-digit ZIP codes) instead of 5 or 9 bytes.
Also, it seems like it wouldn't hurt display output much. It is trivial to slap a ToString() on a numeric value, use simple string manipulation to insert a hyphen or space or whatever for the +4 extension, and use string formatting to restore leading zeroes.
Is there anything that would discourage using int as a datatype for US-only ZIP codes?
A numeric ZIP code is -- in a small way -- misleading.
Numbers should mean something numeric. ZIP codes don't add or subtract or participate in any numeric operations. 12309 - 12345 does not compute the distance from downtown Schenectady to my neighborhood.
Granted, for ZIP codes, no one is confused. However, for other number-like fields, it can be confusing.
Since ZIP codes aren't numbers -- they just happen to be coded with a restricted alphabet -- I suggest avoiding a numeric field. The 1-byte saving isn't worth much. And I think that that meaning is more important than the byte.
Edit.
"As for leading zeroes..." is my point. Numbers don't have leading zeros. The presence of meaningful leading zeros on ZIP codes is yet another proof that they're not numeric.
Are you going to ever store non-US postal codes? Canada is 6 characters with some letters. I usually just use a 10 character field. Disk space is cheap, having to rework your data model is not.
Use a string with validation. Zip codes can begin with 0, so numeric is not a suitable type. Also, this applies neatly to international postal codes (e.g. UK, which is up to 8 characters). In the unlikely case that postal codes are a bottleneck, you could limit it to 10 characters, but check out your target formats first.
Here are validation regexes for UK, US and Canada.
Yes, you can pad to get the leading zeroes back. However, you're theoretically throwing away information that might help in case of errors. If someone finds 1235 in the database, is that originally 01235, or has another digit been missed?
Best practice says you should say what you mean. A zip code is a code, not a number. Are you going to add/subtract/multiply/divide zip codes? And from a practical perspective, it's far more important that you're excluding extended zips.
Normally you would use a non-numerical datatype such as a varchar which would allow for more zip code types. If you are dead set on only allowing 5 digit [XXXXX] or 9 digit [XXXXX-XXXX] zip codes, you could then use a char(5) or char(10), but I would not recommend it. Varchar is the safest and most sane choice.
Edit: It should also be noted that if you don't plan on doing numerical calculations on the field, you should not use a numerical data type. ZIP Code is a not a number in the sense that you add or subtract against it. It is just a string that happens to be made up typically of numbers, so you should refrain from using numerical data types for it.
From a technical standpoint, some points raised here are fairly trivial. I work with address data cleansing on a daily basis - in particular cleansing address data from all over the world. It's not a trivial task by any stretch of the imagination. When it comes to zip codes, you could store them as an integer although it may not be "semantically" correct. The fact is, the data is of a numeric form whether or not, strictly speaking it is considered numeric in value.
However, the very real drawback of storing them as numeric types is that you'll lose the ability to easily see if the data was entered incorrectly (i.e. has missing values) or if the system removed leading zeros leading to costly operations to validate potentially invalid zip codes that were otherwise correct.
It's also very hard to force the user to input correct data if one of the repercussions is a delay of business. Users often don't have the patience to enter correct data if it's not immediately obvious. Using a regex is one way of guaranteeing correct data, however if the user enters a value that doesn't conform and they're displayed an error, they may just omit this value altogether or enter something that conforms but is otherwise incorrect. One example [using Canadian postal codes] is that you often see A0A 0A0 entered which isn't valid but conforms to the regex for Canadian postal codes. More often than not, this is entered by users who are forced to provide a postal code, but they either don't know what it is or don't have all of it correct.
One suggestion is to validate the whole of the entry as a unit validating that the zip code is correct when compared with the rest of the address. If it is incorrect, then offering alternate valid zip codes for the address will make it easier for them to input valid data. Likewise, if the zip code is correct for the street address, but the street number falls outside the domain of that zip code, then offer alternate street numbers for that zip code/street combination.
No, because
You never do math functions on zip code
Could contain dashes
Could start with 0
NULL values sometimes interpreted as zero in case of scalar types
like integer (e.g. when you export the data somehow)
Zip code, even if it's a number, is a designation of an area,
meaning this is a name instead of a numeric quantity of anything
Unless you have a business requirement to perform mathematical calculations on ZIP code data, there's no point in using an INT. You're over engineering.
Hope this helps,
Bill
ZIP Codes are traditionally digits, as well as a hyphen for Zip+4, but there is at least one Zip+4 with a hyphen and capital letters:
10022-SHOE
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/saks-fifth-avenue-celebrates-the-10th-birthday-of-its-famed-10022-shoe-salon-300504519.html
Realistically, a lot of business applications will not need to support this edge case, even if it is valid.
Integer is nice, but it only works in the US, which is why most people don't do it. Usually I just use a varchar(20) or so. Probably overkill for any locale.
If you were to use an integer for US Zips, you would want to multiply the leading part by 10,000 and add the +4. The encoding in the database has nothing to do with input validation. You can always require the input to be valid or not, but the storage is matter of how much you think your requirements or the USPS will change. (Hint: your requirements will change.)
I learned recently that in Ruby one reason you would want to avoid this is because there are some zip codes that begin with leading zeroes, which–if stored as in integer–will automatically be converted to octal.
From the docs:
You can use a special prefix to write numbers in decimal, hexadecimal, octal or binary formats. For decimal numbers use a prefix of 0d, for hexadecimal numbers use a prefix of 0x, for octal numbers use a prefix of 0 or 0o…
I think the ZIP code in the int datatype can affect the ML-model. Probably, the higher the code can create outlier in the data for the calculation
In the last 3 companies I've worked at, the phone number columns are of type varchar(n). The reason being that they might want to store extensions (ext. 333). But in every case, the "-" characters are stripped out when inserting and updating. I don't understand why the ".ext" characters are okay to store but not the "-" character. Has any one else seen this and what explanation can you think of for doing it this way? If all you want to store is the numbers, then aren't you better off using an int field? Conversely, if you want to store the number as a string/varchar, then why not keep all the characters and not bother with formatting on display and cleaning on write?
I'm also interested in hearing about other ways in which phone number storage is implemented in other places.
Quick test: are you going to add/subtract/multiply/divide Phone Numbers? Nope. Similarly to SSNs, Phone Numbers are discrete pieces of data that can contain actual numbers, so a string type is probably most appropriate.
one point with storing phone numbers is a leading 0.
eg: 01202 8765432
in an int column, the 0 will be stripped of, which makes the phone number invalid.
I would hazard a guess at the - being swapped for spaces is because they dont actually mean anything
eg: 123-456-789 = 123 456 789 = 123456789
Personally, I wouldn't strip out any characters, as depending on where the phone number is from, it could mean different things. Leave the phone number in the exact format it was entered, as obviously that's the way the person who typed it in is used to seeing it.
It doesn't really matter how you store it, as long as it's consistent. The norm is to strip out formatting characters, but you can also store country code, area code, exchange, and extension separately if you have a need to query on those values. Again, the requirement is that it's consistent - otherwise querying it is a PITA.
Another reason I can think of not to store phone numbers as 'numbers' but as strings of characters, is that often enough part of the software stack you'd use to access the database (PHP, I am looking at you) wouldn't support big enough integers (natively) to be able to store some of the longer and/or exotic phone numbers.
Largest number that 32-bits can carry, without sign, is 4294967295. That wouldn't work for just any Russian mobile phone number, take, for instance, the number 4959261234.
So you have yourself an extra inconvenience of finding a way to carry more than 32-bits worth of number data. Even though databases have long supported very large integers, you only need one bad link in the chain for a showstopper. Like PHP, again.
Stripping some characters and allowing others may have an impact if the database table is going to drive another system, e.g. IP Telephony of some sort. Depending on the systems involved, it may be legitimate to have etc.333 as a suffix, whereas the developers may not have accounted for "-" in the string (and yes, I am guessing here...)
As for storing as a varchar rather than an int, this is just plain-ole common sense to me. As mentioned before, leading zeros may be stripped in an int field, the query on an int field may perform implicit math functions (which could also explain stripping "-" from the text, you don't want to enter 555-1234 and have it stored as -679 do you?)
In short, I don't know the exact reasoning, but can deduce some possibilities.
I'd opt to store the digits as a string and add the various "()" and "-" in my display code. It does get more difficult with international numbers. We handle it by having various "internationalized" display formats depending on country.
What I like to do if I know the phone numbers are only going to be within a specific region, such as North America, is to change the entry into 4 fields. 3 for area code, 3 for prefix, 3 for line, and maybe 5 for extension. I then insert these as 1 field with '-' and maybe an 'e' to designate extension. Any searching of course also needs to follow the same process. This ensures I get more regular data and even allows for the number to be used for actually making a phone call, once the - and the extension are removed. I can also get back to original 4 fields easily.
Good stuff! It seems that the main point is that the formatting of the phone number is not actually part of the data but is instead an aspect of the source country. Still, by keeping the extension part of the number as is, one might be breaking the model of separating the formatting from the data. I doubt that all countries use the same syntax/format to describe an extension. Additionally, if integrating with a phone system is a (possible) requirement, then it might be better to store the extension separately and build the message as it is expected. But Mark also makes a good point that if you are consistent, then it probably won't matter how you store it since you can query and process it consistently as well.
Thank you Eric for the link to the other question.
When an automated telephone system uses a field to make a phone call it may not be able to tell what characters it should use and which it should ignore in dialing. A human being may see a "(" or ")" or "-" character and know these are considered delimiters separating the area code, npa, and nxx of the phone number. Remember though that each character represents a binary pattern that, unless pre-programmed to ignore, would be entered by an automated dialer. To account for this it is better to store the equivalent of only the characters a user would press on the phone handset and even better that the individual values be stored in separate columns so the dialer can use individual fields without having to parse the string.
Even if not using dialing automation it is a good practice to store things you dont need to update in the future. It is much easier to add characters between fields than strip them out of strings.
In comment of using a string vs. integer datatype as noted above strings are the proper way to store phone numbers based on variations between countries. There is an important caveat to that though in that while aggregating statistics for reporting (i.e. SUM of how many numbers or calls) character strings are MUCH slower to count than integers. To account for this its important to add an integer as an identity column that you can use for counting instead of the varchar or char field datatype.