Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
// glob returns an ordered list (rtfm: man glob)
// relies on the use of the operator ++ to generate string sequences.
function lastFileInSequence($path, $prefix, $first, $suffix) {
return array_pop(glob($path . "/" . $prefix . str_repeat('?',
strlen($first)) . $suffix));
}
function nextFileInSequence($path, $prefix, $first, $suffix) {
if ($lastFile = basename(lastFileInSequence($path, $prefix, $first,
$suffix), $suffix)) {
return ++$lastFile . $suffix;
} else {
return $prefix . $first . $suffix;
}
}
$nextImage = $path . "/" . nextFileInSequence($path, "foo_", "01", ".jpg");
2007/9/26, brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I have a directory that contains many images (no, not pr0n,
> unfortunately) and i'm working on an admin script for adding to it. I've
> got something that works alright but i'm wondering if there's a Better
> Way.
>
> Each image is named like: foo_01.jpg, foo_02.jpg, bar_01.jpg, and so on.
> When adding a new image it should be assigned the next number in the
> series (the prefix is known). Thus, given the prefix 'bar' i do
> something like:
>
> function getNextImage($path, $prefix)
> {
>$pattern = "/^${prefix}_([0-9]{2})\.[a-z]{3}$/";
>
>$filenames = glob("${path}${prefix}*");
>
>if (is_array($filenames) && sizeof($filenames))
>{
> sort($filenames);
>
> /* eg. 'foo_32.jpg'
> */
> $last = basename(array_pop($filenames));
>
> /* pull the number from the filename
> */
> $count = intval(preg_replace($pattern, '$1', $last));
>
> /* increment, format with leading zero again if necessary,
> * and return it
> */
> return sprintf('%02d', ++$count)
>}
>else
>{
> return '01';
>}
> }
>
> Note that there almost certainly will never be more than 99 images to a
> series. In any case, i don't care about there being more than one
> leading zero. One is what i want.
>
> brian
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
At 11:47 PM -0400 9/29/07, brian wrote: You and i have had our run-ins on this list on more than one occasion. Until now, i've chosen to take your crap in stride. brian I haven't noticed any "run-ins". I don't care if you've been the biggest prick on the net -- if you ask a question and it's within my scope to answer, I'll try to answer -- that's what this list is about. I seldom remember who said what, nor do I keep score -- I haven't got time for that. As for taking "crap", that's your perception for I don't dish any out. If you take offense to anything I say, then say so and I'll explain myself -- I'm not here to insult anyone. I haven't got time for that either. If you have nothing constructive to add then STFU. If I do shut up, or not, will be my decision and not your's. You seem to have an attitude that the net is yours and our time is here for you to use and abuse at your will. Clearly, you have some unrealized issues -- but, that's your problem to work out. However, when I see someone try to help another and see that it's not appreciated, then I can make comment if I want because it IS constructive to point out civility on the net. Telling someone to fuck-off or calling someone a dick-head is certainly not constructive and degrades the professionalism of the list. That should be obvious. If you want to be treated fairly, then treat others that way. Don't always assume that you're right and everyone else is wrong and thus you have liberty to call people names because that doesn't promote an exchange of information, which is what this list is about. It's clear, at least to me, that you have problems with that as well. So, why don't we let this thread drop -- you called everyone names and used whatever language you thought appropriate and I hope you feel better now. Hopefully next time, we can all be more civil to each other. Cheers, tedd Look, there's nothing you can say to me that hasn't been said before (some of it deserving), so my advice is for you to refrain from such conduct and at least try to look professional. That way you'll hide your ignorance a little longer -- it's always worked for me. This is me laughing. I'm sure you have no bloody idea how funny that statement looks from where i'm sitting. See the paragraph above. Dan Parry wrote: Can I please interject and say that I vastly respect Tedd(ddd) and Rob(bb?) and their opinions It's not so much that i disrespect Rob. It's just that i felt i had to call him out for being a dickhead by taking my statement out of context. Tedd ... not so very much at all. Robert Cummings wrote: On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 12:05 -0400, tedd wrote: At 10:39 PM -0400 9/26/07, brian wrote: fuck you, too, asswipe Seems to be, an extra, comma, in the phrase. It reads, like Captain Kirk, saying, it. Funny. Reminds of a Capt. Kirk quote: "No more blah, blah, blah!" brian -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
gee you guys behave like kids. don't you all have other things to do than whinge, swear and blame each other on the list? Take it elsewhere and sort it out. This is bad for the PHP community in general. It doesn't reflect what the community is about. my 2c. On Sunday 30 September 2007 13:47, brian wrote: > tedd wrote: > > At 8:30 PM -0400 9/27/07, brian wrote: > >> I wasn't bitching! And i *thought* that my numerous attempts at > >> explaining such would have been enough. Obviously not, but wtf can you > >> do with people who seem to want only to stir up shit? > > > > It sure sounded like you were bitching. > > Gee, thanks for pointing that out, Jeeves. I'd say it's pretty damned > obvious now that Rob thought i was bitching about his response to my > query. However, if you'd have bothered to note my replies since, you > might have twigged to the fact that i'd been trying to set that > straight. But you just *had* to send off your own dickish response. > > > And, your off-list "fuck you, too, asswipe" to me certainly seems to > > support that -- don't you think? > > How so? Had it crossed your little mind that maybe--just maybe--i was > becoming not a little frustrated with the fact that my reply had been > taken the wrong way? That, instead of accepting that and moving on, this > had become far too OT with bullshit comments such as yours? So, yeah, > you might say that i'm bitching *now*. > > You and i have had our run-ins on this list on more than one occasion. > Until now, i've chosen to take your crap in stride. If you have nothing > constructive to add then STFU. > > > Look, there's nothing you can say to me that hasn't been said before > > (some of it deserving), so my advice is for you to refrain from such > > conduct and at least try to look professional. That way you'll hide your > > ignorance a little longer -- it's always worked for me. > > This is me laughing. I'm sure you have no bloody idea how funny that > statement looks from where i'm sitting. See the paragraph above. > > > Dan Parry wrote: > >> Can I please interject and say that I vastly respect Tedd(ddd) and > >> Rob(bb?) and their opinions > > It's not so much that i disrespect Rob. It's just that i felt i had to > call him out for being a dickhead by taking my statement out of context. > > Tedd ... not so very much at all. > > Robert Cummings wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 12:05 -0400, tedd wrote: > At 10:39 PM -0400 9/26/07, brian wrote: > >>> > >>>fuck you, too, asswipe > > > > Seems to be, an extra, comma, in the phrase. It reads, like Captain > > Kirk, saying, it. > > Funny. Reminds of a Capt. Kirk quote: > "No more blah, blah, blah!" > > brian -- Powered by openSUSE 10.2 (i586) Kernel: 2.6.18.8-0.5-default KDE: 3.5.5 "release 45.4" 10:55pm up 10 days 2:22, 3 users, load average: 0.13, 0.18, 0.17 -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 23:47 -0400, brian wrote: > > It's not so much that i disrespect Rob. It's just that i felt i had to > call him out for being a dickhead by taking my statement out of context. Ok, so I'm a dickhead. What does that make you? A vagina? Name calling really is the lowest form of argumentation. It was fun when I was 7. So were swear words. Cheers, Rob. -- ... SwarmBuy.com - http://www.swarmbuy.com Leveraging the buying power of the masses! ... -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
tedd wrote: At 8:30 PM -0400 9/27/07, brian wrote: I wasn't bitching! And i *thought* that my numerous attempts at explaining such would have been enough. Obviously not, but wtf can you do with people who seem to want only to stir up shit? It sure sounded like you were bitching. Gee, thanks for pointing that out, Jeeves. I'd say it's pretty damned obvious now that Rob thought i was bitching about his response to my query. However, if you'd have bothered to note my replies since, you might have twigged to the fact that i'd been trying to set that straight. But you just *had* to send off your own dickish response. And, your off-list "fuck you, too, asswipe" to me certainly seems to support that -- don't you think? How so? Had it crossed your little mind that maybe--just maybe--i was becoming not a little frustrated with the fact that my reply had been taken the wrong way? That, instead of accepting that and moving on, this had become far too OT with bullshit comments such as yours? So, yeah, you might say that i'm bitching *now*. You and i have had our run-ins on this list on more than one occasion. Until now, i've chosen to take your crap in stride. If you have nothing constructive to add then STFU. Look, there's nothing you can say to me that hasn't been said before (some of it deserving), so my advice is for you to refrain from such conduct and at least try to look professional. That way you'll hide your ignorance a little longer -- it's always worked for me. This is me laughing. I'm sure you have no bloody idea how funny that statement looks from where i'm sitting. See the paragraph above. Dan Parry wrote: Can I please interject and say that I vastly respect Tedd(ddd) and Rob(bb?) and their opinions It's not so much that i disrespect Rob. It's just that i felt i had to call him out for being a dickhead by taking my statement out of context. Tedd ... not so very much at all. Robert Cummings wrote: > On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 12:05 -0400, tedd wrote: > At 10:39 PM -0400 9/26/07, brian wrote: >>>fuck you, too, asswipe > > Seems to be, an extra, comma, in the phrase. It reads, like Captain > Kirk, saying, it. > Funny. Reminds of a Capt. Kirk quote: "No more blah, blah, blah!" brian -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
Can I please interject and say that I vastly respect Tedd(ddd) and Rob(bb?) and their opinions Dsn -- Dan Parry Senior Developer Virtua Webtech Ltd Company Number: 5078356 Vat Number: 827044536 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.virtuawebtech.co.uk 01745 354924 > -Original Message- > From: tedd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 28 September 2007 17:20 > To: brian; php-general@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros > > At 8:30 PM -0400 9/27/07, brian wrote: > >I wasn't bitching! And i *thought* that my numerous attempts at > >explaining such would have been enough. Obviously not, but wtf can you > >do with people who seem to want only to stir up shit? > > It sure sounded like you were bitching. > > And, your off-list "fuck you, too, asswipe" to me certainly seems to > support that -- don't you think? > > Look, there's nothing you can say to me that hasn't been said before > (some of it deserving), so my advice is for you to refrain from such > conduct and at least try to look professional. That way you'll hide > your ignorance a little longer -- it's always worked for me. > > Cheers, > > tedd > -- > --- > http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.33/1034 - Release Date: > 27/09/2007 17:00 -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
At 8:30 PM -0400 9/27/07, brian wrote: I wasn't bitching! And i *thought* that my numerous attempts at explaining such would have been enough. Obviously not, but wtf can you do with people who seem to want only to stir up shit? It sure sounded like you were bitching. And, your off-list "fuck you, too, asswipe" to me certainly seems to support that -- don't you think? Look, there's nothing you can say to me that hasn't been said before (some of it deserving), so my advice is for you to refrain from such conduct and at least try to look professional. That way you'll hide your ignorance a little longer -- it's always worked for me. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
tedd wrote:
At 3:58 PM -0400 9/26/07, brian wrote:
Well, this is almost precisely the same thing i have, save for
using POSIX character classes, str_pad instead of sprintf(), and
incrementing elsewhere. What i was really wondering is if there was
a *much simpler* way to do this, not just re-arranging things.
Rob just gave you code that works better than what you did and you're
bitching about it?
Look, none of us are on your payroll so appreciate what you're given.
My advice, says thanks and if the code doesn't meet your expectations
then learn how to better phrase your question next time.
tedd
I wasn't bitching! And i *thought* that my numerous attempts at
explaining such would have been enough. Obviously not, but wtf can you
do with people who seem to want only to stir up shit?
Jim Lucas wrote:
Well, I didn't want to get into the middle of this cat fight, but now
that the talks have completely gotten off topic. I will
interject...
Perfect timing, then.
Here is a function that is a bit simpler then either of yours.
Now, if you plan to delete any images in the list, this will not
work.
There's a daemon that locks the dir, zips up the contents, moves it
elsewhere, then removes everything at once.
function getNextImage($path, $prefix) { $filelist =
glob("${path}${prefix}*") or return '01'; return
str_pad(((int)count($filelist)+1), 2, '0', STR_PAD_LEFT); }
?>
Sweet! Thanks much!
brian
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
At 10:39 PM -0400 9/26/07, brian wrote: Now you're obviously just trying to be a dickhead. While someone is, it's not Rob. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
Robert Cummings wrote: Suit yourself. But better programmer's don't just wave their hands in the air and hope for the best. Ah crap -- there's another technique I have to cross off my list. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
At 3:58 PM -0400 9/26/07, brian wrote: Well, this is almost precisely the same thing i have, save for using POSIX character classes, str_pad instead of sprintf(), and incrementing elsewhere. What i was really wondering is if there was a *much simpler* way to do this, not just re-arranging things. Rob just gave you code that works better than what you did and you're bitching about it? Look, none of us are on your payroll so appreciate what you're given. My advice, says thanks and if the code doesn't meet your expectations then learn how to better phrase your question next time. tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 21:56 -0700, Jim Lucas wrote:
>
> Now, if you plan to delete any images in the list, this will not work.
>
> But if you don't expect to delete any images in the list and always want
> the ($total_images + 1), then follow along.
>
>
> function getNextImage($path, $prefix) {
>$filelist = glob("${path}${prefix}*") or return '01';
>return str_pad(((int)count($filelist)+1), 2, '0', STR_PAD_LEFT);
> }
>
> ?>
Nice :)
Cheers,
Rob.
--
...
SwarmBuy.com - http://www.swarmbuy.com
Leveraging the buying power of the masses!
...
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
brian wrote:
I have a directory that contains many images (no, not pr0n,
unfortunately) and i'm working on an admin script for adding to it. I've
got something that works alright but i'm wondering if there's a Better Way.
Each image is named like: foo_01.jpg, foo_02.jpg, bar_01.jpg, and so on.
When adding a new image it should be assigned the next number in the
series (the prefix is known). Thus, given the prefix 'bar' i do
something like:
function getNextImage($path, $prefix)
{
$pattern = "/^${prefix}_([0-9]{2})\.[a-z]{3}$/";
$filenames = glob("${path}${prefix}*");
if (is_array($filenames) && sizeof($filenames))
{
sort($filenames);
/* eg. 'foo_32.jpg'
*/
$last = basename(array_pop($filenames));
/* pull the number from the filename
*/
$count = intval(preg_replace($pattern, '$1', $last));
/* increment, format with leading zero again if necessary,
* and return it
*/
return sprintf('%02d', ++$count)
}
else
{
return '01';
}
}
Note that there almost certainly will never be more than 99 images to a
series. In any case, i don't care about there being more than one
leading zero. One is what i want.
brian
Well, I didn't want to get into the middle of this cat fight, but now
that the talks have completely gotten off topic. I will interject...
Here is a function that is a bit simpler then either of yours.
Now, if you plan to delete any images in the list, this will not work.
But if you don't expect to delete any images in the list and always want
the ($total_images + 1), then follow along.
This should work, I don't have a setup to test it on, but you should get
the idea...
...
now remember...
if glob fails, it will return '01'
if glob returns and empty array, it will return '01'
if glob succeeds, it will return the array length + 1 padded (if needed)
by one zero
You asked for less function calls in your function, here you go
Jim
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 00:23 -0400, brian wrote: > Robert Cummings wrote: > > When you use sort() the default behaviour is a lexical sort. This is why > > the 100th index breaks your system. I'm not trying to be a dickhead, > > just pointing out the flaw in your logic. You may be well aware that in > > counting 100 comes after 99, but it would seem you are not well aware > > that in a lexical sort 100 will come first. > > > > I realise that this has been going on for some time now but i did say > that this app will not--cannot--reach to 100. If it were to do so, my > "system" would have become broken *long* before it reached sort(). > Lexical sorting of '99' & '100' has nothing to do with this. > > Just pointing out the flaw in your persistence with this. Actually your original message said the following: "Note that there almost certainly will never be more than 99 images to a series. In any case, i don't care about there being more than one leading zero. One is what i want." "Almost certainly" last time I checked does not equal "will not". Cheers, Rob. -- ... SwarmBuy.com - http://www.swarmbuy.com Leveraging the buying power of the masses! ... -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
Robert Cummings wrote: When you use sort() the default behaviour is a lexical sort. This is why the 100th index breaks your system. I'm not trying to be a dickhead, just pointing out the flaw in your logic. You may be well aware that in counting 100 comes after 99, but it would seem you are not well aware that in a lexical sort 100 will come first. I realise that this has been going on for some time now but i did say that this app will not--cannot--reach to 100. If it were to do so, my "system" would have become broken *long* before it reached sort(). Lexical sorting of '99' & '100' has nothing to do with this. Just pointing out the flaw in your persistence with this. b -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 22:39 -0400, brian wrote: > Robert Cummings wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 19:10 -0400, brian wrote: > > > >>If my response to that gave you the impression i was > >>complaining, i assure you that i wasn't. I was simply suggesting > >>that i was wondering if there was a *much* simpler way to do this, ie. > >>without using several functions to process the filename. Yes, your > >>version *does* have some improvements. I'm not disagreeing with you. > >>Perhaps i could have been more forthright in my praise for said > >>improvements (i'm even going to use some of them--how about that?!) > > > > > > Well, I'm not looking for praise... but asking a concise question goes a > > long way towards meeting your desires. > > How was my question *not* concise? If anything, it was my first reply to > you that i could have spent more time on. Once again: your reply was > valid, your corrections were taken into consideration, *but* i was > simply wondering if there was a more (yes) concise way to do what i > wanted. My humble apologies (really). > > >>IOW, i'm not stupid; i'm well aware that 100 comes after > >>99 and that it contains 3 digits, not 2, thanks very much. > > > > > > Nope, 100 comes *before* 99 when lexically sorting. > > > > You must be new around here. > > > > Did i say anything there about lexically sorting? The query i posted > here was about counting. That last comment? Yep, counting again. Now > you're obviously just trying to be a dickhead. Well done. When you use sort() the default behaviour is a lexical sort. This is why the 100th index breaks your system. I'm not trying to be a dickhead, just pointing out the flaw in your logic. You may be well aware that in counting 100 comes after 99, but it would seem you are not well aware that in a lexical sort 100 will come first. > You must be charming to work with. Quite. Cheers, Rob. -- ... SwarmBuy.com - http://www.swarmbuy.com Leveraging the buying power of the masses! ... -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
Robert Cummings wrote: On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 19:10 -0400, brian wrote: If my response to that gave you the impression i was complaining, i assure you that i wasn't. I was simply suggesting that i was wondering if there was a *much* simpler way to do this, ie. without using several functions to process the filename. Yes, your version *does* have some improvements. I'm not disagreeing with you. Perhaps i could have been more forthright in my praise for said improvements (i'm even going to use some of them--how about that?!) Well, I'm not looking for praise... but asking a concise question goes a long way towards meeting your desires. How was my question *not* concise? If anything, it was my first reply to you that i could have spent more time on. Once again: your reply was valid, your corrections were taken into consideration, *but* i was simply wondering if there was a more (yes) concise way to do what i wanted. My humble apologies (really). IOW, i'm not stupid; i'm well aware that 100 comes after 99 and that it contains 3 digits, not 2, thanks very much. Nope, 100 comes *before* 99 when lexically sorting. You must be new around here. Did i say anything there about lexically sorting? The query i posted here was about counting. That last comment? Yep, counting again. Now you're obviously just trying to be a dickhead. Well done. You must be charming to work with. brian -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 19:10 -0400, brian wrote: > Robert Cummings wrote: > > >> Well, this is almost precisely the same thing i have, save for > >> using POSIX character classes, str_pad instead of sprintf(), and > >> incrementing elsewhere. What i was really wondering is if there was > >> a *much simpler* way to do this, not just re-arranging things. > > > > > > You asked for a "Better Way". I gave you a "Better Way". I improved > > the regex, removed the useless basename() call, performed > > incrementation in the extraction step, used better function and > > variable names, and used the str_pad() function because sprintf() is > > overkill. I also removed your redundant else clause. My version is > > much simpler. How much is much? You know... much! Other than using a > > database, it doesn't really get any simpler. Although you obviously > > have race condition issues also. But that's not getting "simpler". > > It's getting more correct but also a bit more complex. > > > > Bad day or something? Nope. > Did it really seem that i was bitching about your > response? Kinda. > If my response to that gave you the impression i was > complaining, i assure you that i wasn't. I was simply suggesting > that i was wondering if there was a *much* simpler way to do this, ie. > without using several functions to process the filename. Yes, your > version *does* have some improvements. I'm not disagreeing with you. > Perhaps i could have been more forthright in my praise for said > improvements (i'm even going to use some of them--how about that?!) Well, I'm not looking for praise... but asking a concise question goes a long way towards meeting your desires. > >>> Note that the moment you get 100 images the code breaks because > >>> _100 sorts before _99 and so you will always write over the 100th > >>> index. To fix this you need to loop through all found files and > >>> pull the index out and record the highest found. > >> > >> For my purposes, if any series gets much beyond 40 i'll have bigger > >> problems to worry about. I'm content to not worry about overflow > >> in this case. > > > > Suit yourself. But better programmer's don't just wave their hands in > > the air and hope for the best. > > While i agree with you in principle, i'm not interested in that aspect > of it. The application would have halted *long* before it could reach > that many. This is why i went to the trouble of pointing this out in the > original mail. IOW, i'm not stupid; i'm well aware that 100 comes after > 99 and that it contains 3 digits, not 2, thanks very much. Nope, 100 comes *before* 99 when lexically sorting. You must be new around here. Cheers, Rob. -- ... SwarmBuy.com - http://www.swarmbuy.com Leveraging the buying power of the masses! ... -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 15:58 -0400, brian wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 15:11 -0400, brian wrote:
I have a directory that contains many images (no, not pr0n,
unfortunately) and i'm working on an admin script for adding to
it. I've got something that works alright but i'm wondering if
there's a Better Way.
Each image is named like: foo_01.jpg, foo_02.jpg, bar_01.jpg,
and so on. When adding a new image it should be assigned the
next number in the series (the prefix is known). Thus, given
the prefix 'bar' i do something like:
function getNextImage($path, $prefix) { $pattern =
"/^${prefix}_([0-9]{2})\.[a-z]{3}$/";
$filenames = glob("${path}${prefix}*"); if
(is_array($filenames) && sizeof($filenames)) {
sort($filenames);
/* eg. 'foo_32.jpg' */ $last = basename(array_pop($filenames));
/* pull the number from the filename */ $count =
intval(preg_replace($pattern, '$1', $last));
/* increment, format with leading zero again if necessary, *
and return it */ return sprintf('%02d', ++$count) } else {
return '01'; } }
Note that there almost certainly will never be more than 99
images to a series. In any case, i don't care about there being
more than one leading zero. One is what i want.
function getNextImageIndex( $path, $prefix ) { // // Matches
files like foo_123.png // $pattern =
'/.*_([[:digit:]]+)\.[[:alpha:]]{3}$/';
$filenames = glob( "${path}${prefix}*" );
if( $filenames ) { sort( $filenames );
$last = array_pop( $filenames );
It needs basename here because the array has the full path of each
file.
No it doesn't. I changed the pattern to make it simpler.
My bad. I didn't look at it closely enough.
$nextIndex = (int)preg_replace( $pattern, '$1', $last ) + 1;
return str_pad( $nextIndex, 2, '0', STR_PAD_LEFT ); }
return '01'; }
?>
Well, this is almost precisely the same thing i have, save for
using POSIX character classes, str_pad instead of sprintf(), and
incrementing elsewhere. What i was really wondering is if there was
a *much simpler* way to do this, not just re-arranging things.
You asked for a "Better Way". I gave you a "Better Way". I improved
the regex, removed the useless basename() call, performed
incrementation in the extraction step, used better function and
variable names, and used the str_pad() function because sprintf() is
overkill. I also removed your redundant else clause. My version is
much simpler. How much is much? You know... much! Other than using a
database, it doesn't really get any simpler. Although you obviously
have race condition issues also. But that's not getting "simpler".
It's getting more correct but also a bit more complex.
Bad day or something? Did it really seem that i was bitching about your
response? If my response to that gave you the impression i was
complaining, i assure you that i wasn't. I was simply suggesting
that i was wondering if there was a *much* simpler way to do this, ie.
without using several functions to process the filename. Yes, your
version *does* have some improvements. I'm not disagreeing with you.
Perhaps i could have been more forthright in my praise for said
improvements (i'm even going to use some of them--how about that?!)
Note that the moment you get 100 images the code breaks because
_100 sorts before _99 and so you will always write over the 100th
index. To fix this you need to loop through all found files and
pull the index out and record the highest found.
For my purposes, if any series gets much beyond 40 i'll have bigger
problems to worry about. I'm content to not worry about overflow
in this case.
Suit yourself. But better programmer's don't just wave their hands in
the air and hope for the best.
While i agree with you in principle, i'm not interested in that aspect
of it. The application would have halted *long* before it could reach
that many. This is why i went to the trouble of pointing this out in the
original mail. IOW, i'm not stupid; i'm well aware that 100 comes after
99 and that it contains 3 digits, not 2, thanks very much.
b
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 15:58 -0400, brian wrote:
> Robert Cummings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 15:11 -0400, brian wrote:
> >
> >>I have a directory that contains many images (no, not pr0n,
> >>unfortunately) and i'm working on an admin script for adding to it. I've
> >>got something that works alright but i'm wondering if there's a Better Way.
> >>
> >>Each image is named like: foo_01.jpg, foo_02.jpg, bar_01.jpg, and so on.
> >>When adding a new image it should be assigned the next number in the
> >>series (the prefix is known). Thus, given the prefix 'bar' i do
> >>something like:
> >>
> >>function getNextImage($path, $prefix)
> >>{
> >> $pattern = "/^${prefix}_([0-9]{2})\.[a-z]{3}$/";
> >>
> >> $filenames = glob("${path}${prefix}*");
> >>
> >> if (is_array($filenames) && sizeof($filenames))
> >> {
> >> sort($filenames);
> >>
> >> /* eg. 'foo_32.jpg'
> >> */
> >> $last = basename(array_pop($filenames));
> >>
> >> /* pull the number from the filename
> >> */
> >> $count = intval(preg_replace($pattern, '$1', $last));
> >>
> >> /* increment, format with leading zero again if necessary,
> >> * and return it
> >> */
> >> return sprintf('%02d', ++$count)
> >> }
> >> else
> >> {
> >> return '01';
> >> }
> >>}
> >>
> >>Note that there almost certainly will never be more than 99 images to a
> >>series. In any case, i don't care about there being more than one
> >>leading zero. One is what i want.
> >
> >
> > >
> > function getNextImageIndex( $path, $prefix )
> > {
> > //
> > // Matches files like foo_123.png
> > //
> > $pattern = '/.*_([[:digit:]]+)\.[[:alpha:]]{3}$/';
> >
> > $filenames = glob( "${path}${prefix}*" );
> >
> > if( $filenames )
> > {
> > sort( $filenames );
> >
> > $last = array_pop( $filenames );
>
>
> It needs basename here because the array has the full path of each file.
No it doesn't. I changed the pattern to make it simpler.
> > $nextIndex = (int)preg_replace( $pattern, '$1', $last ) + 1;
> >
> > return str_pad( $nextIndex, 2, '0', STR_PAD_LEFT );
> > }
> >
> > return '01';
> > }
> >
> > ?>
>
>
> Well, this is almost precisely the same thing i have, save for using
> POSIX character classes, str_pad instead of sprintf(), and incrementing
> elsewhere. What i was really wondering is if there was a *much simpler*
> way to do this, not just re-arranging things.
You asked for a "Better Way". I gave you a "Better Way". I improved the
regex, removed the useless basename() call, performed incrementation in
the extraction step, used better function and variable names, and used
the str_pad() function because sprintf() is overkill. I also removed
your redundant else clause. My version is much simpler. How much is
much? You know... much! Other than using a database, it doesn't really
get any simpler. Although you obviously have race condition issues also.
But that's not getting "simpler". It's getting more correct but also a
bit more complex.
> > Note that the moment you get 100 images the code breaks because _100
> > sorts before _99 and so you will always write over the 100th index. To
> > fix this you need to loop through all found files and pull the index out
> > and record the highest found.
>
> For my purposes, if any series gets much beyond 40 i'll have bigger
> problems to worry about. I'm content to not worry about overflow in this
> case.
Suit yourself. But better programmer's don't just wave their hands in
the air and hope for the best.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
...
SwarmBuy.com - http://www.swarmbuy.com
Leveraging the buying power of the masses!
...
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 15:11 -0400, brian wrote:
I have a directory that contains many images (no, not pr0n,
unfortunately) and i'm working on an admin script for adding to it. I've
got something that works alright but i'm wondering if there's a Better Way.
Each image is named like: foo_01.jpg, foo_02.jpg, bar_01.jpg, and so on.
When adding a new image it should be assigned the next number in the
series (the prefix is known). Thus, given the prefix 'bar' i do
something like:
function getNextImage($path, $prefix)
{
$pattern = "/^${prefix}_([0-9]{2})\.[a-z]{3}$/";
$filenames = glob("${path}${prefix}*");
if (is_array($filenames) && sizeof($filenames))
{
sort($filenames);
/* eg. 'foo_32.jpg'
*/
$last = basename(array_pop($filenames));
/* pull the number from the filename
*/
$count = intval(preg_replace($pattern, '$1', $last));
/* increment, format with leading zero again if necessary,
* and return it
*/
return sprintf('%02d', ++$count)
}
else
{
return '01';
}
}
Note that there almost certainly will never be more than 99 images to a
series. In any case, i don't care about there being more than one
leading zero. One is what i want.
if( $filenames )
{
sort( $filenames );
$last = array_pop( $filenames );
It needs basename here because the array has the full path of each file.
$nextIndex = (int)preg_replace( $pattern, '$1', $last ) + 1;
return str_pad( $nextIndex, 2, '0', STR_PAD_LEFT );
}
return '01';
}
?>
Well, this is almost precisely the same thing i have, save for using
POSIX character classes, str_pad instead of sprintf(), and incrementing
elsewhere. What i was really wondering is if there was a *much simpler*
way to do this, not just re-arranging things.
Note that the moment you get 100 images the code breaks because _100
sorts before _99 and so you will always write over the 100th index. To
fix this you need to loop through all found files and pull the index out
and record the highest found.
For my purposes, if any series gets much beyond 40 i'll have bigger
problems to worry about. I'm content to not worry about overflow in this
case.
brian
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] counting with leading zeros
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 15:11 -0400, brian wrote:
> I have a directory that contains many images (no, not pr0n,
> unfortunately) and i'm working on an admin script for adding to it. I've
> got something that works alright but i'm wondering if there's a Better Way.
>
> Each image is named like: foo_01.jpg, foo_02.jpg, bar_01.jpg, and so on.
> When adding a new image it should be assigned the next number in the
> series (the prefix is known). Thus, given the prefix 'bar' i do
> something like:
>
> function getNextImage($path, $prefix)
> {
>$pattern = "/^${prefix}_([0-9]{2})\.[a-z]{3}$/";
>
>$filenames = glob("${path}${prefix}*");
>
>if (is_array($filenames) && sizeof($filenames))
>{
> sort($filenames);
>
> /* eg. 'foo_32.jpg'
> */
> $last = basename(array_pop($filenames));
>
> /* pull the number from the filename
> */
> $count = intval(preg_replace($pattern, '$1', $last));
>
> /* increment, format with leading zero again if necessary,
> * and return it
> */
> return sprintf('%02d', ++$count)
>}
>else
>{
> return '01';
>}
> }
>
> Note that there almost certainly will never be more than 99 images to a
> series. In any case, i don't care about there being more than one
> leading zero. One is what i want.
Note that the moment you get 100 images the code breaks because _100
sorts before _99 and so you will always write over the 100th index. To
fix this you need to loop through all found files and pull the index out
and record the highest found.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
...
SwarmBuy.com - http://www.swarmbuy.com
Leveraging the buying power of the masses!
...
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
