24 replies to this topic

[HotKeyIt]

Contains++

[infogulch]

Contains++

Good question, what happens when you increment a function?

obj := { fn: Func("function") }

obj.fn++

msgbox % obj.fn() 

function() {
    return A_ThisFunc " called!"
}

Hmm doesn't do much, just calls the function...

:lol:

[nimda]

great obfuscation technique too

[Lexikos]

Hmm doesn't do much, just calls the function...

That's a bug. The correct behaviour is to assign and return an empty string. Instead, it skips the assignment and returns an empty string. obj.fn := obj.fn + 1 and obj.fn += 1 should produce the correct result.

[infogulch]

Oh, uh well I totally meant to point out that bug...

In any case, what do you guys think of Max() and Min() ?

I've been thinking, I would actually prefer to have two additional built-in object functions: ObjMax() & ObjMin().

This would allow the greatest flexibility.
[*:16dxnusg]Use it on an existing object: myobject.max()
[*:16dxnusg]Create an object just to find the max value: ObjMax([1,12,123,1234])If some crazy person (me) wants something that returns the min/max of args, a simple variadic function wrapper would work great:

max(x*) {
    return ObjMax(x)
}
min(x*) {
    return ObjMin(x)
}

max(a, 123, c * 4)

[IsNull]

I thought also about this. Even already implemented Methods seem to be inconsistent;

names := []
names.Insert("Mary")
names.Remove("Mary") ; won't work, as remove bases on indexes

This goes in the same direction of "obj.IndexOf(value)"

All in all, obj.contains(), obj.count() are very important, but actually just for lists and not required in the base Object.

Wouldnt it be a better idea, to provide a second Object called List/Collection, which provides that functionality? Is this possible with the current prototype implementation?

obj := {} ; create a standard key-value Object (which is actually a dictionary)
array := [] ; create Collection/List with .count(), .add(val), .remove(val), .sort() etc.

If this is not an option, we could at least provide a standard lib with classes for Collection, Delegate etc, which are shipped with AHK_L.

[trismarck]

+1 for .keyCount() (count of numeric and non-numeric keys combined).

[AHK Johns]

Count() for both array and dictionary. Min/Max is not so useful compared to Count. cardinality is basic premise of any collection. Array can live with with MaxIndex(). I was surprised to find that dictionary doesn't have so basic count (), which diminished its usefulness.

[joedf]

For reference purposes :

ObjCount(Obj) {
	if (!IsObject(Obj))
		return 0
	z:=0
	for k in Obj
		z+=1 ;or z:=A_Index
	return z
}