Addiing only an 'into' clauset would indeed be a bit silly - my plan was to transplant another 'filter' feature: the ability to sort an expression. This would allow you to write:
sort theFirstList & return & theSecondList into theSortedList Of course, you could still write that in two lines, with little performance penalty. But a future version of the engine could optimise the one-liner by parallelising the operations… Jan Schenkel. ===== Quartam Reports & PDF Library for LiveCode www.quartam.com ===== "As we grow older, we grow both wiser and more foolish at the same time." (La Rochefoucauld) -------------------------------------------- On Wed, 1/8/14, Peter Haworth <p...@lcsql.com> wrote: Subject: Re: There should be a "unique" option on sort . . . To: "How to use LiveCode" <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> Date: Wednesday, January 8, 2014, 3:24 PM I think that would be useful Jan, but it's pretty easy to put the unsorted container into a different container then sort it so I'm not sure it's worth your time and effort. Pete Pete lcSQL Software <http://www.lcsql.com> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Jan Schenkel <janschen...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi Mark et al, > > The 'sort' command should return the same content, not throw out chunks, > that might be better as an extension to the 'filter' command. > But your comment about how sort affects the original container made me > wonder. > > So I took another look at the source for the 'sort' command in cmds.cpp, > and it doesn't look that hard to add an 'into' clause. > Putting the sorted data into another container is straightforward to add > to MCSort::exec (done that for the 'filter' command). > The hardest part is untangling the MCSort::parse spaghetti. > > If I find the time I might take a stab at it… > > Cheers, > > Jan Schenkel. > > ===== > Quartam Reports & PDF Library for LiveCode > www.quartam.com > > ===== > "As we grow older, we grow both wiser and more foolish at the same time." > (La Rochefoucauld) > > -------------------------------------------- > On Sat, 1/4/14, Mark Wieder <mwie...@ahsoftware.net> wrote: > > Subject: Re: There should be a "unique" option on sort . . . > To: "How to use LiveCode" <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> > Date: Saturday, January 4, 2014, 5:02 PM > > > yes, or to only take the first > that matches the sort key if sorting by > > other than the full record. > > I can see it being slightly useful in certain cases, but it > leaves me > feeling a bit queasy. I think it's unsettling enough that > the sort > command sorts in place instead of being a function that > returns a > sorted copy, and of course it's way too late to change that > now. So > deleting items from a dataset while sorting them seems one > more step > down that ladder. I do realize that you'd have to specify > "unique" > explicitly, but still... if it didn't mess with the original > data set > I'd be all over this. > > -- > -Mark Wieder > ahsoftw...@gmail.com > > > _______________________________________________ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
