Talend - How to pass an Array from a ChildJob to a ParentJob - arrays

How can I pass an array from a ChildJob to a ParentJob?
The array values came from : tExtractXMLField -> tFlowToIterate.
I've done it by using a Routine (like this: https://help.talend.com/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=5671107), but I'm interesting in another approach, where Routines are no needed.

This could be very very tricky, since the only way to pass variables to a subjob is through context vars, which are Strings.
You can concat the elements of the array (in a tJavaRow, for example) and then feed a String context var to pass and split() and cast inside the child job. It's a quick-and-dirty solution, but only suitable for small arrays, obviously.
I'm afraid the official KB you linked is the most advisable way to do it, even if you need a user routine

Related

Shared pointer in rust arrays

I have two arrays:
struct Data {
all_objects: Vec<Rc<dyn Drawable>>;
selected_objects: Vec<Rc<dyn Drawable>>;
}
selected_objects is guarenteed to be a subset of all_objects. I want to be able to somehow be able to add or remove mutable references to selected objects.
I can add the objects easily enough to selected_objects:
Rc::get_mut(selected_object).unwrap().select(true);
self.selected_objects.push(selected_object.clone());
However, if I later try:
for obj in self.selected_objects.iter_mut() {
Rc::get_mut(obj).unwrap().select(false);
}
This gives a runtime error, which matches the documentation for get_mut: "Returns None otherwise, because it is not safe to mutate a shared value."
However, I really want to be able to access and call arbitrary methods on both arrays, so I can efficiently perform operations on the selection, while also being able to still perform operations for all objects.
It seems Rc does not support this, it seems RefMut is missing a Clone() that alows me to put it into multiple arrays, plus not actually supporting dyn types. Box is also missing a Clone(). So my question is, how do you store writable pointers in multiple arrays? Is there another type of smart pointer for this purpose? Do I need to nest them? Is there some other data structure more suitable? Is there a way to give up the writable reference?
Ok, it took me a bit of trial and error, but I have a ugly solution:
struct Data {
all_objects: Vec<Rc<RefCell<dyn Drawable>>>;
selected_objects: Vec<Rc<RefCell<dyn Drawable>>>;
}
The Rc allows you to store multiple references to an object. RefCell makes these references mutable. Now the only thing I have to do is call .borrow() every time I use a object.
While this seems to work and be reasonably versitle, I'm still open for cleaner solutions.

How compare two arrays of objects with assertArrayEquals

I want to compare two arrays of objects.
but there is not suitable method found for that method since it doesnt accept objects other from String, Integer etc..
I already override Equals method on the objects of the array.
But how do i pass the array to the method?
Assert.assertArrayEquals(esperado.getListaEquiposTorneo(), resultado.getListaEquiposTorneo());
//esperado.getListaEquiposTorneo(), resultado.getListaEquiposTorneo()) list 1 and 2 of objects made by me
First, you should be able to just use assertEquals
Assert.assertEquals(esperado.getListaEquiposTorneo(),
resultado.getListaEquiposTorneo());
I prefer to use Hamcrest as it gives better error messages
assertThat(actualArray,
IsArrayContainingInOrder.arrayContaining(
expectedArray));
assertThat(resultado.getListaEquiposTorneo(),
IsArrayContainingInOrder.arrayContaining(
esperado.getListaEquiposTorneo()));
IsArrayContainingInOrder
See Tomasz Nurkiewicz answer:
ArrayUtils.isEquals() from Apache Commons does exactly that. It also handles multi-dimensional arrays.
you can use a simple AssertTrue on the result

Haskell map/sortBy/findIndex etc. for Arrays instead of Lists

I can see that it's possible to write functions like map/sortBy/findIndex and some other List-related functions for Arrays instead (at least those indexed by integers.) Is this done anywhere in the standard library, or would I need to roll my own?
I need to use an array in my program for the in-place update, but there are also several locations I'd like to use some of the above list functions on it. Is converting back and forth between the two the best solution?
(The arrays I've been looking at are from Data.Array.IArray. I'm also happy to use any other array library that implements this functionality.)
I recommend you have a look at the vector and vector-algorithms packages. They contain very efficient implementations of many common operations on Int-indexed arrays, in both mutable and immutable variants.
fmap (from Control.Monad) is sort of like a generic version of map that works on anything that supports the Functor type class. Array supports that, so you should be able to use fmap instead of map for array.
As hammar says, the vector and vector-algorithms are probably a better way to approach the problem if you need to consider indexed arrays.

Multidimensional array of gtkwidgets

Is it possible to create a multidimensional array of gtkwidgets? Specifically something like this:
mywidgetlist[2]["title"];
Or should I be doing this in a different way? How would I do this?
Basically I have a number of "widgets" (Loaded from gtkbuilder) composed of smaller widgets and I want to be able to change certain values, so this array setup seems preferable.
Is there another way of doing this (Other than actually coding a complete widget using signals etc and placing them in a simple array?)
In C, you cannot use a string to index into an array. Or, strictly speaking you can, but it's almost never what you want to do.
For C solution using glib (handy if you already use GTK+), consider a single-dimensional array of GHashTable pointers.

efficient sort with custom comparison, but no callback function

I have a need for an efficient sort that doesn't have a callback, but is as customizable as using qsort(). What I want is for it to work like an iterator, where it continuously calls into the sort API in a loop until it is done, doing the comparison in the loop rather than off in a callback function. This way the custom comparison is local to the calling function (and therefore has access to local variables, is potentially more efficient, etc). I have implemented this for an inefficient selection sort, but need it to be efficient, so prefer a quick sort derivative.
Has anyone done anything like this? I tried to do it for quick sort, but trying to turn the algorithm inside out hurt my brain too much.
Below is how it might look in use.
// the array of data we are sorting
MyData array[5000], *firstP, *secondP;
// (assume data is filled in)
Sorter sorter;
// initialize sorter
int result = sortInit (&sorter, array, 5000,
(void **)&firstP, (void **)&secondP, sizeof(MyData));
// loop until complete
while (sortIteration (&sorter, result) == 0) {
// here's where we do the custom comparison...here we
// just sort by member "value" but we could do anything
result = firstP->value - secondP->value;
}
Turning the sort function inside out as you propose isn't likely to make it faster. You're trading indirection on the comparison function for indirection on the item pointers.
It appears you want your comparison function to have access to state information. The quick-n-dirty way to create global variables or a global structure, assuming you don't have more than one thread going at once. The qsort function won't return until all the data is sorted, so in a single threaded environment this should be safe.
The only other thing I would suggest is to locate a source to qsort and modify it to take an extra parameter, a pointer to your state structure. You can then pass this pointer into your comparison function.
Take an existing implementation of qsort and update it to reference the Sorter object for its local variables. Instead of calling a compare function passed in, it would update its state and return to the caller.
Because of recursion in qsort, you'll need to keep some sort of a state stack in your Sorter object. You could accomplish that with an array or a linked-list using dynamic allocation (less efficient). Since most qsort implementations use tail recursion for the larger half and make a recursive call to qsort for the smaller half of the pivot point, you can sort at least 2n elements if your array can hold n states.
A simple solution is to use a inlineble sort function and a inlineble compare callback. When compiled with optimisation, both call get flatten into each other exactly like you want. The only downside is that your choice of sort algorithm is limited because if you recurse or alloc more memory you potentially lose any benefit from doing this. Method with small overhead, like this, work best with small data set.
You can use generic sort function with compare method, size, offset and stride.This way custom comparison can be done by parameter rather then callback. With this way you can use any algorithm. Just use some macro to fill in the most common case because you will have a lot of function argument.
Also, check out the STB library (https://github.com/nothings/stb).
It has sorting function similar to this among many other useful C tools.
What you're asking for has already been done -- it's called std::sort, and it's already in the C++ standard library. Better support for this (among many other things) is part of why well-written C++ is generally faster than C.
You could write a preprocessor macro to output a sort routine, and have the macro take a comparison expression as an argument.
#define GENERATE_SORT(name, type, comparison_expression) \
void name(type* begin, type* end) \
{ /* ... when needed, fill a and b and use comparison_expression */ }
GENERATE_SORT(sort_ints, (*a<*b))
void foo()
{
int array[10];
sort_ints(array, array+10);
}
Two points. I).
_asm
II). basic design limits of compilers.
Compilers have, as a basic purpose, the design goal of avoiding assembler or machine code. They achieve this by imposing certain limits. In this case, we give up a flexibility that we can easily do in assembly code. i.e. split the generated code of the sort into two pieces at the call to the compare function. copy the first half to somewhere. next copy the generated code of the compare function to there, just after the previous copied code of the first part. then copy the last half of the sort code. Finally, we have to deal with a whole series of minor details. See also the concept of "hot patching" running programs.

Resources