[Open] Watch List sorting for command created variables

[jpuziano]

Hi Marcus,

In reference to your answer to JRL's post here: Separate> Suggestion (resolved)(RegEx solution)

I ran the code you supplied:

RegEx>.,String1%CRLF%String2,0,var,var_count,0

and here's the variables created as shown in the Watch List. Note that ~ below represents either CR or LF:

VAR_6=g
VAR_5=n
VAR_8=~
VAR_7=1
VAR_2=t
VAR_1=S
VAR_4=i
VAR_3=r
VAR_9=~
VAR_15=g
VAR_14=n
VAR_COUNT=16
VAR_16=2
VAR_11=t
VAR_10=S
VAR_13=i
VAR_12=r

I wanted to see if each character was captured so to get a better view, I right-clicked on the Watch list and used the Sort function. Now the variables looked like this:

VAR_1=S
VAR_10=S
VAR_11=t
VAR_12=r
VAR_13=i
VAR_14=n
VAR_15=g
VAR_16=2
VAR_2=t
VAR_3=r
VAR_4=i
VAR_5=n
VAR_6=g
VAR_7=1
VAR_8=~
VAR_9=~
VAR_COUNT=16

That's better but still mixed around somewhat.

Would it be possible, at least for the variables created by MS commands like Separate, Regex, etc., to have them appear like this in the Watch List when we click Sort:

VAR_1=S
VAR_2=t
VAR_3=r
VAR_4=i
VAR_5=n
VAR_6=g
VAR_7=1
VAR_8=~
VAR_9=~
VAR_10=S
VAR_11=t
VAR_12=r
VAR_13=i
VAR_14=n
VAR_15=g
VAR_16=2
VAR_COUNT=16

Possible? Impossible? Outrageous? Your thoughts?

[gdyvig]

Hi jpuziano,

Looks possible if the command does the VAR_COUNT before it starts writing out the variables. Sorting will work if you know how many leading zeroes to supply. Maybe an arbitrary large number of leading zeroes for a reasonable worst case.

VAR_01=S
VAR_02=t
VAR_03=r
VAR_04=i
VAR_05=n
VAR_06=g
VAR_07=1
VAR_08=~
VAR_09=~
VAR_10=S
VAR_11=t
VAR_12=r
VAR_13=i
VAR_14=n
VAR_15=g
VAR_16=2
VAR_COUNT=16

Gale

[jpuziano]

Looks possible if the command does the VAR_COUNT before it starts writing out the variables.

Hi Gale,

Thanks for your post. Using that sort of solution, in this case, it would know there are 16 values and therefore, one leading zero is required and it would name the created variables accordingly.

The benefit there is, no changes to the sort function would be required as the leading zeros would make the sort come out right.

The problem with that solution is that it is not backwards compatible with code already written. For example, elsewhere in the code, I refer to the variable as VAR_1 because I know it will ALWAYS be named VAR_1. If it occasionally named it VAR_01 or VAR_001, that would break code that is looking for VAR_1 so I don't think that approach would be well received.

And yes, I know I could programatically check for the existance of VAR_1 and if not found, check for VAR_01 and if not found... on and on... but I'd certainly rather not.

On the other hand, a more intelligent sort would not break any existing code.

Marcus, can the Watch List sort routine be enhanced so that it displays these numbered variables (created by certain MS commands) in numerically ascending order?

[Marcus Tettmar]

If the watch list is NOT sorted, the variables are listed in the order of creation, based on time. If it IS sorted they are alphabetically sorted, and the list above is correct.

I don't really see another way to do it, though on the (much) longer term I would like to create "proper" array type variables, and then the watch list would just show VAR_ and allow you to expand it to see the elements in the right order. But this is not imminent.

[jpuziano]

OK, fair enough, thanks for the reply.