Expansion help needed, getvariable and TABLE

Expansion help needed, getvariable and TABLE

[Rik Kabel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2841 bytes --]

Listers,

I have a problem, and a question on ConTeXt programming efficiency.

In the example below, I have a set of variables. When these are 
reference directly via \getvariable, everything works as expected in 
simple text and in TABLEs. When I \define a macro to the \getvariable, 
that works in simple text, but only the value of the last iteration 
appears in the TABLE. The macro definition is saved and when it is used, 
that is the value that it has.

So, how can I \define (or \def, ...) a macro to the expanded value to 
avoid this? That is the problem.

The question is, Is there is any advantage to be had in doing this? 
Assume that the value is referenced many (tens of) times. There seems to 
be an aesthetic value of factoring out the multiple identical instances 
of the \getvariable syntax and assigning a more semantically informative 
name, but beyond that, is there any other value?

    % macros=mkvi engine=luajittex

    \setvariables      [one]
                        [a=1a,b=1b]
    \setvariables      [two]
                        [a=2a,b=2b]

    \define            \Sets
                        {one,two}

    \starttexdefinition unexpanded doInlineText #SET
         Direct: \getvariable{#SET}{a} \getvariable{#SET}{b}\par
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttexdefinition unexpanded doTableRow #SET
         \bTR
           \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{a}\eTC
           \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{b}\eTC
         \eTR
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttexdefinition doInlineTextExp #SET
         \define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
         \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
         Factored: \A\ \B\par
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttexdefinition doTableRowExp #SET
         \define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
         \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
         \bTR
           \bTC\A\eTC
           \bTC\B\eTC
         \eTR
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttext

    \starttext

    \expandafter\processcommalist\expandafter[\Sets]\doInlineText

         \bTABLE[frame=off]
           \bTABLEhead
             \bTR[nc=2]
               \bTH Direct\eTH
             \eTR
           \eTABLEhead
           \bTABLEbody
    \expandafter\processcommalist\expandafter[\Sets]\doTableRow
           \eTABLEbody
         \eTABLE

    \expandafter\processcommalist\expandafter[\Sets]\doInlineTextExp

         \bTABLE[frame=off]
           \bTABLEhead
             \bTR[nc=2]
               \bTH Factored\eTH
             \eTR
           \eTABLEhead
           \bTABLEbody
    \expandafter\processcommalist\expandafter[\Sets]\doTableRowExp
           \eTABLEbody
         \eTABLE

    \stoptext

-- 
Rik


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3815 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 492 bytes --]

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Expansion help needed, getvariable and TABLE

[Rik Kabel]

On 2018-01-30 21:10, Rik Kabel wrote:
>
> Listers,
>
> I have a problem, and a question on ConTeXt programming efficiency.
>
> In the example below, I have a set of variables. When these are 
> reference directly via \getvariable, everything works as expected in 
> simple text and in TABLEs. When I \define a macro to the \getvariable, 
> that works in simple text, but only the value of the last iteration 
> appears in the TABLE. The macro definition is saved and when it is 
> used, that is the value that it has.
>
> So, how can I \define (or \def, ...) a macro to the expanded value to 
> avoid this? That is the problem.
>
> The question is, Is there is any advantage to be had in doing this? 
> Assume that the value is referenced many (tens of) times. There seems 
> to be an aesthetic value of factoring out the multiple identical 
> instances of the \getvariable syntax and assigning a more semantically 
> informative name, but beyond that, is there any other value?
>

Replying to my own query, I see that I just have to localize the 
definitions by grouping them, as

\starttexdefinition doTableRowExp #SET
    {\define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
     \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
     \bTR
       \bTC\A\eTC
       \bTC\B\eTC
     \eTR}
\stoptexdefinition

Does it matter if I use {}, \bgroup\egroup, or some other mechanism?

My style question is still outstanding.

-- 
Rik
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Expansion help needed, getvariable and TABLE

[Wolfgang Schuster]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1596 bytes --]


> Rik Kabel <mailto:context@rik.users.panix.com>
> 31. Januar 2018 um 03:10
>
> Listers,
>
> I have a problem, and a question on ConTeXt programming efficiency.
>
> In the example below, I have a set of variables. When these are 
> reference directly via \getvariable, everything works as expected in 
> simple text and in TABLEs. When I \define a macro to the \getvariable, 
> that works in simple text, but only the value of the last iteration 
> appears in the TABLE. The macro definition is saved and when it is 
> used, that is the value that it has.
>
> So, how can I \define (or \def, ...) a macro to the expanded value to 
> avoid this? That is the problem.
>
> The question is, Is there is any advantage to be had in doing this? 
> Assume that the value is referenced many (tens of) times. There seems 
> to be an aesthetic value of factoring out the multiple identical 
> instances of the \getvariable syntax and assigning a more semantically 
> informative name, but beyond that, is there any other value?
>
>
Natural tables collect the content of all cells to perform the width and 
height calculations
and you have to expand the content of the cells to get the current value 
of \getvariable.

\starttexdefinition unexpanded doTableRow #SET
     \bTR
       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{a}\eTC}
       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{b}\eTC}
     \eTR
\stoptexdefinition


BTW: You can use the \processcommacommand command when you save your 
lists in a macro (no need for \expandafter).

\defineexpandable\Sets{one,two}

\processcommacommand[\Sets]\doInlineTextExp


Wolfgang

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2874 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 492 bytes --]

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Expansion help needed, getvariable and TABLE

[Rik Kabel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5305 bytes --]

On 2018-01-31 01:04, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
>
>> Rik Kabel <mailto:context@rik.users.panix.com>
>> 31. Januar 2018 um 03:10
>>
>> Listers,
>>
>> I have a problem, and a question on ConTeXt programming efficiency.
>>
>> In the example below, I have a set of variables. When these are 
>> reference directly via \getvariable, everything works as expected in 
>> simple text and in TABLEs. When I \define a macro to the 
>> \getvariable, that works in simple text, but only the value of the 
>> last iteration appears in the TABLE. The macro definition is saved 
>> and when it is used, that is the value that it has.
>>
>> So, how can I \define (or \def, ...) a macro to the expanded value to 
>> avoid this? That is the problem.
>>
>> The question is, Is there is any advantage to be had in doing this? 
>> Assume that the value is referenced many (tens of) times. There seems 
>> to be an aesthetic value of factoring out the multiple identical 
>> instances of the \getvariable syntax and assigning a more 
>> semantically informative name, but beyond that, is there any other value?
>>
>>
> Natural tables collect the content of all cells to perform the width 
> and height calculations
> and you have to expand the content of the cells to get the current 
> value of \getvariable.
>
> \starttexdefinition unexpanded doTableRow #SET
>     \bTR
>       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{a}\eTC}
>       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{b}\eTC}
>     \eTR
> \stoptexdefinition
>
>
> BTW: You can use the \processcommacommand command when you save your 
> lists in a macro (no need for \expandafter).
>
> \defineexpandable\Sets{one,two}
>
> \processcommacommand[\Sets]\doInlineTextExp
>
>
> Wolfgang

Thank you for the help and the processcommacommand bit. However, the 
problem is still there (and I was just wrong in my own follow-up).

Below is an updated example with and without the \expanded{\bTC...

It does not seem to make a difference here, but perhaps it is needed in 
some situations.

My question is about factoring the \getvariable out of the \bTC rows (in 
this example) and \defining a simpler macro to hold the value. Should it 
be done, and if so, how?

    % macros=mkvi engine=luajittex

    \setvariables      [one]
                        [a=1aaaaaaaa,b=1b,c=1c]
    \setvariables      [two]
                        [a=2a,b=2bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb,c=2c]

    \defineexpandable  \Sets
                        {one,two}

    \starttexdefinition unexpanded doInlineText #SET
         Direct: \getvariable{#SET}{a} \getvariable{#SET}{b}\
                 \getvariable{#SET}{c}\par
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttexdefinition unexpanded doTableRow #SET
         \bTR
           \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{a}\eTC
           \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{b}\eTC
           \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{c}\eTC
         \eTR
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttexdefinition doInlineTextExpA #SET
         \define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
         \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
         \define\C{\getvariable{#SET}{c}}
         Factored A: \A\ \B\ \C\par
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttexdefinition doTableRowExpA #SET
         \define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
         \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
         \define\C{\getvariable{#SET}{c}}
         \bTR
           \bTC\A\eTC
           \bTC\B\eTC
           \bTC\C\eTC
         \eTR
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttexdefinition doInlineTextExpB #SET
         \define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
         \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
         \define\C{\getvariable{#SET}{c}}
         Factored B: \A\ \B\ \C\par
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
         \define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
         \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
         \define\C{\getvariable{#SET}{c}}
         \bTR
           \expanded{\bTC\A\eTC}
           \expanded{\bTC\B\eTC}
           \expanded{\bTC\C\eTC}
         \eTR
    \stoptexdefinition

    \starttext

         \processcommacommand[\Sets]\doInlineText

         \bTABLE[frame=off]
           \bTABLEhead
             \bTR[nc=2]
               \bTH Direct\eTH
             \eTR
           \eTABLEhead
           \bTABLEbody
               \processcommacommand[\Sets]\doTableRow
           \eTABLEbody
         \eTABLE

         \processcommacommand[\Sets]\doInlineTextExpA

         \bTABLE[frame=off]
           \bTABLEhead
             \bTR[nc=2]
               \bTH Factored A\eTH
             \eTR
           \eTABLEhead
           \bTABLEbody
             \processcommacommand[\Sets]\doTableRowExpA
           \eTABLEbody
         \eTABLE

         \processcommacommand[\Sets]\doInlineTextExpB

         \bTABLE[frame=off]
           \bTABLEhead
             \bTR[nc=2]
               \bTH Factored B\eTH
             \eTR
           \eTABLEhead
           \bTABLEbody
             \processcommacommand[\Sets]\doTableRowExpB
           \eTABLEbody
         \eTABLE

    \stoptext



-- 
RIk


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 8754 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 492 bytes --]

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Expansion help needed, getvariable and TABLE

[Wolfgang Schuster]

Rik Kabel schrieb:
> \starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
>     \define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
>     \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
>     \define\C{\getvariable{#SET}{c}}
>     \bTR
>       \expanded{\bTC\A\eTC}
>       \expanded{\bTC\B\eTC}
>       \expanded{\bTC\C\eTC}
>     \eTR
> \stoptexdefinition

You can’t use \define but it creates non expandable commands
(which can be solved when you use \defineexpandable instead)
and there is no need for this extra step.

\starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
     \bTR
       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{a}\eTC}
       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{b}\eTC}
       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{c}\eTC}
     \eTR
\stoptexdefinition

Wolfgang
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Expansion help needed, getvariable and TABLE

[Rik Kabel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2116 bytes --]

On 2018-01-31 09:54, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
> Rik Kabel schrieb:
>> \starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
>>     \define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
>>     \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
>>     \define\C{\getvariable{#SET}{c}}
>>     \bTR
>>       \expanded{\bTC\A\eTC}
>>       \expanded{\bTC\B\eTC}
>>       \expanded{\bTC\C\eTC}
>>     \eTR
>> \stoptexdefinition
>
> You can’t use \define but it creates non expandable commands
> (which can be solved when you use \defineexpandable instead)
> and there is no need for this extra step.
>
> \starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
>     \bTR
>       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{a}\eTC}
>       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{b}\eTC}
>       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{c}\eTC}
>     \eTR
> \stoptexdefinition
>
> Wolfgang
> ___________________________________________________________________________________ 
>
> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry 
> to the Wiki!
>
> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / 
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
> webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
> archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
> wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
> ___________________________________________________________________________________

Great. This does the job, and allows assigning more 
semantically-meaningful names to the elements.

    \starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
         \defineexpandable\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
         \defineexpandable\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
         \defineexpandable\C{\getvariable{#SET}{c}}
         \bTR
           \expanded{\bTC\A\eTC}
           \expanded{\bTC\B\eTC}
           \expanded{\bTC\C\eTC}
         \eTR
    \stoptexdefinition

I see no performance difference on a much larger test, and I think that 
the readability is improved (and thus the opportunity for simple 
mistakes) when the hundreds of \getvariable macros are refactored into a 
few macro definitions.

Thank you once again.

-- 
Rik


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3778 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 492 bytes --]

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Expansion help needed, getvariable and TABLE

[Hans Hagen]

On 1/31/2018 4:40 PM, Rik Kabel wrote:
> On 2018-01-31 09:54, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
>> Rik Kabel schrieb:
>>> \starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
>>>     \define\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
>>>     \define\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
>>>     \define\C{\getvariable{#SET}{c}}
>>>     \bTR
>>>       \expanded{\bTC\A\eTC}
>>>       \expanded{\bTC\B\eTC}
>>>       \expanded{\bTC\C\eTC}
>>>     \eTR
>>> \stoptexdefinition
>>
>> You can’t use \define but it creates non expandable commands
>> (which can be solved when you use \defineexpandable instead)
>> and there is no need for this extra step.
>>
>> \starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
>>     \bTR
>>       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{a}\eTC}
>>       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{b}\eTC}
>>       \expanded{\bTC\getvariable{#SET}{c}\eTC}
>>     \eTR
>> \stoptexdefinition
>>
>> Wolfgang
>> ___________________________________________________________________________________ 
>>
>> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry 
>> to the Wiki!
>>
>> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / 
>> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
>> webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
>> archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
>> wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
>> ___________________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Great. This does the job, and allows assigning more 
> semantically-meaningful names to the elements.
> 
>     \starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
>          \defineexpandable\A{\getvariable{#SET}{a}}
>          \defineexpandable\B{\getvariable{#SET}{b}}
>          \defineexpandable\C{\getvariable{#SET}{c}}
>          \bTR
>            \expanded{\bTC\A\eTC}
>            \expanded{\bTC\B\eTC}
>            \expanded{\bTC\C\eTC}
>          \eTR
>     \stoptexdefinition
> 
> I see no performance difference on a much larger test, and I think that 
> the readability is improved (and thus the opportunity for simple 
> mistakes) when the hundreds of \getvariable macros are refactored into a 
> few macro definitions.

maybe the next can convince you then

\starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
     \expanded {\bTR
       \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{a}\eTC
       \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{b}\eTC
       \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{c}\eTC
     \eTR}
\stoptexdefinition

with

\starttexdefinition doTableRowExpB #SET
     \normalexpanded {\bTR
       \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{a}\eTC
       \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{b}\eTC
       \bTC\getvariable{#SET}{c}\eTC
     \eTR}
\stoptexdefinition

being a bit faster

Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
        tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________