List Commands Library for 50g

[DavidM]

(10-01-2017 12:56 PM)pier4r Wrote:  Or is it too better to use the built in ADD ? Like:
L2: { 0 0 1 0 2 }
L1: { 3 2 0 0 1 } (maybe a bit cumbersome to create?)
ADD

Of course, given the increment, one then would request for subtractions as well (and in the best case multiplication, division). This let me think that maybe the built in operations are already good, since they are already there.

Reading through your description, I kept having the feeling that there were simply too many potential variations for this to be turned into a generic function. It seemed like you were beginning to come to that same conclusion in your request .

One thing I'd point out, though, is that creating the list identified above as L1 could be done fairly easily from the originals in your example as follows:

Code:

\<<
  { 0 0 1 0 2 }
  { 1 2 5 }
  { 3 2 1 }
  PICK3 SIZE
  \-> pos val sz
  \<<
    0 sz NDUPN \->LIST
    pos val 2 \<< PUT \>> DOLIST
  \>>
\>>

(after which you can apply whatever function you need: ADD, -, *, etc.).

(10-01-2017 12:56 PM)pier4r Wrote:  Also random pick from a list. ...

Once again, it seems to me that this type of thing is best left for your own specific uses. There's lots of room for interpretation here, with lots of perspectives. With or without replacement? Should the list be randomized once, or after each selection? ...and more. Each variation may indicate a different approach for implementation.

While the LSHUF command performs reasonably well (especially in the most recent version), it is a "big hammer" in that it shuffles the entire list. You may not actually need all of that shuffling going on to do what you need. If you simply need 3 random elements from a list of 3000, it hardly makes sense to shuffle the entire list just to do 1 3 SUB. And that approach assumes "without replacement", which may or may not be appropriate for any given situation.

(10-01-2017 12:56 PM)pier4r Wrote:  I could have collected various short and fast programs already while reading the forum. Actually I should do it, to provide myself and others with a valid library for lazy people like me)

I think that's a good approach.

(10-01-2017 03:45 PM)pier4r Wrote:  If I have to do it by myself I do it obviously, but putting it in a library would save (for every user and for every place it is used) development/testing time.

But that assumes that the command in question has the same input/output that everyone else would need. I don't see that being the case here.