E2 array and table additions

[immibis]

E2 should have the following functions:

• R:removeShift(N) - Removes the array entry at that index, shifts all higher indices down by 1
• R:remove(N) - Removes the array entry at that index, does not affect other indices
• T:remove(S) - Removes the entry with that index
• R:contains(N) - Returns 1 if the array contains the number as an index, 0 otherwise.
• R:containsValue(*) - Returns 1 if the array contains the object as a value, 0 otherwise. (useful but not necessary)
• T:contains(S) - Returns 1 if the table contains the string as a key, 0 otherwise.
• T:containsValue(*) - Returns 1 if the table contains the object as a value, 0 otherwise. (probably not very useful)
• R:getType(N) - Returns the type of the value with index N. (probably not very useful)
• T:getType(S) - Returns the type of the value with key S. (probably not very useful)

Currently there's no way to remove entries from tables or arrays (except for R:unshift* and Rop*) and no way to check if a table or array contains a given key/index reliably. (you could use if(Array[N, number]) but what if it contains the index and it's 0? and what if it's not a number?)

[Techni]

You can do all of these via regular array functions through loops and such, adding them to the LUA wouldn't have any speed increase as you'd still have to search through the entire array/table for most of these.

R:removeShift(N)
That's how the current array remove works.

R:remove(N)
Not really possible (That's not how arrays work)

T:remove(S)
Can be done by setting the string to a null value, ie 0, vec(), noentity() etc

R:contains(N)
Requires a linear search through the array, can be done in 3 lines of E2 code and will be laggy with large arrays even in LUA. Use a lookup table

R:containsValue(*)
As above

T:contains(S)
Use a look up table

T:containsValue(*)
use a look up table

# R:getType(N)
# T:getType(S)
Might be useful.

[Divran]

Currently there's no way to remove entries from tables or arrays

R:remove<type>(N) 	 * 	 Deletes and returns the specified entry, moving subsequent entries down to compensate
R:remove(N) 		Deletes the specified entry, moving subsequent entries down to compensate

Wire Expression2 - GMod Wiki

[immibis]

You can do all of these via regular array functions through loops and such, adding them to the LUA wouldn't have any speed increase as you'd still have to search through the entire array/table for most of these.

No, Lua can currently do more with arrays and tables than E2 can.

R:removeShift(N)
That's how the current array remove works.

Okay.

R:remove(N)
Not really possible (That's not how arrays work)

It is in E2. Again,

Array[Index] = nil

T:remove(S)
Can be done by setting the string to a null value, ie 0, vec(), noentity() etc

If doing that removes it from the table, then E2 tables are messed up.

R:contains(N)
Requires a linear search through the array, can be done in 3 lines of E2 code and will be laggy with large arrays even in LUA. Use a lookup table

What about

return (Array[Index] ~= nil)

R:containsValue(*)
As above.

Yes, this one would require a linear search through the array. It would still be a lot easier and slightly faster than doing the same in E2, though, and could use ops proportional to the size of the table. Or it could be omitted altogether, since it's not particularly useful.

T:contains(S)
Use a look up table

Um, what? The table T is the lookup table. That's why you're trying to look up the key S in it. And again,

return (Table[Key] ~= nil)

T:containsValue(*)
use a look up table

Same response as A:containsValue(*) above

Disclaimer: I don't know much Lua so the Lua code provided is probably slightly wrong. However, it's also probably mostly right.

PS. It's Lua not LUA.

[Teh Reborn Devil]

It is in E2. Again,

Array[Index] = nil

That's the same as the remove function. Array[Index,entity] = noentity() will move all entries above one step down.

[Divran]

Array[Index,entity] = noentity() will move all entries above one step down.

No it won't

Um, what? The table T is the lookup table. That's why you're trying to look up the key S in it. And again,

return (Table[Key] ~= nil)

Then what's wrong with the E2 code

if (Table[Key,type]) {

or similar

[immibis]

For numbers and strings at least, that returns false if the entry is not present, 0, or "". T:contains(S) would return false only if the entry is not present.

The way it currently is, I need two lookup tables to do the same thing. One storing the actual data, and another so I can tell whether an entry exists or not.

You seem to be assuming that having an entry equal to 0/""/noranger()/noentity()/nobone() are the same thing as not having any entry at all... It's not. If you have a table storing string data for a group of objects, for example, then "" means the object exists but there's no data on it, and not-present means the object doesn't exist.

[Divran]

Actually, noentity() is the same as not having it at all, because "noentity()" returns "nil". In Lua, setting a table's value to nil removes it. There are a few other data types that do this, but some (like number, string, vector, etc) return their own "nil" values.

e2function entity noentity()
	return nil
end

But yes I see your point

[Teh Reborn Devil]

No it won't

Lol, it does that for me when I play online.

Could be something weird with the servers I play on then.