Re: Record parsing

Thanks again. Once I get it worked out in VBA I'll post it. Since I
have to do it in my spare time it may take a few days. The paying job
has to take priority over my gf's 'little projects".

Think I'll go home and crack open Perl for Dummies, again.


On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:55:52 +0100, John Nurick
<j.mapSoN.nurick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Good luck. The logic in VBA will be pretty much the same as in Perl,
>though the details will be different. Here are a few clues:
>
> @first is an array (like a VBA variant array, but you'll
> need to iterate through a recordset instead)
> $first[0] is the first element in the array, i.e. the phone number
> $first[1] is the second element, i.e. the carrier
> ne translates as <>
> || translates as Or
> unless @first tests whether @first contains a value
> undef @first wipes out all the elements of @first
>
>
>On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 08:01:15 -0700, RD <progr@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>Wow.
>>
>>I always wanted to learn Perl. I even bought "Perl for Dummies" :-)
>>but it's all Greek to me.
>>
>>Anyway, John, thanks for the logic. I guess I better get to coding.
>>
>>Regards,
>>RD
>>
>>
>>On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 23:06:57 +0100, John Nurick
>><j.mapSoN.nurick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>You need to keep track of three rows:
>>>
>>>3) the one you have just read ("next")
>>>2) the one before that ("latest")
>>>1) the row after the last change in carrier, group or company (i.e. the
>>>"first" row with the "latest" combinatoin of carrier, group and
>>>company).
>>>
>>>If "next" has a different carrier, group, or company from "latest", you
>>>need to output a row. If the "latest" phone number is different from the
>>>"first" one, concatenate the two; otherwise just output the single
>>>number, along with the other fields. Then update "latest" from "next",
>>>and - each first iteration after outputting a row - "first" from
>>>"latest".
>>>
>>>This sort of thing is much easier to code in Perl (reading and writing
>>>text files) than in VBA:
>>>
>>>use strict;
>>>my ( @first, @next, @latest );
>>>
>>>while (<>) {
>>> @next = split /\t/, $_ ;
>>>
>>> @first = @latest unless @first;
>>>
>>> if ( $first[1] ne $next[1]
>>> || $first[2] ne $next[2]
>>> || $first[3] ne $next[3] ) { #values have changed
>>>
>>> #append latest number if a range is required
>>> $first[0] .= "-$latest[0]" if ($first[0] ne $latest[0]);
>>>
>>> print join("\t", @first);
>>> undef @first;
>>> }
>>> @latest = @next;
>>>}
>>>
>>>#print last line
>>>if (@first) { #there's a range to print
>>> $first[0] .= "-$latest[0]" ;
>>> print join("\t", @first) ;
>>>} else { #single phone number
>>> print join("\t", @latest);
>>>}
>>>
>>>
>>>On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:16:49 -0800, RD <progr@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have a new one. My gf always manages to send me a problem that
>>>>bends my head. :-)
>>>>
>>>>I have a table (imported from a HUGE text file) with a field for phone
>>>>numbers, another for Carriers, another for Groups, another for Company
>>>>Name and a couple other fields (descriptions or something).
>>>>
>>>>The phone numbers can be sequential or they may not be. In the middle
>>>>of a sequence of numbers the Carrier may change or the Company may
>>>>change or the Group may change or any combination may occur. Or not.
>>>>
>>>>What we need is a way to iterate through the numbers and write records
>>>>to a new table where non-sequential numbers are pretty much written as
>>>>they are but sequential numbers get parsed into a range in one cell.
>>>>She needs to do this to make it easier to move whole blocks of numbers
>>>>between Carriers or Groups or Companies.
>>>>
>>>>A parsed record would look kind of like this:
>>>>
>>>>PhnNum Grp Carr Cmpy
>>>>2013955700-2013955799 covadnj gobeam Focal Comm
>>>>
>>>>With the last fields written as well.
>>>>
>>>>I'm messing with a "little" sample table of over 11,000 lines. Now, I
>>>>can loop with the best of them and I've parsed out plenty of fields
>>>>and text files and such in the past but it's always been in the other
>>>>direction. Y'know, pulling info *out* of ranges and bad
>>>>concatenations not putting them *into* a range.
>>>>
>>>>So, I don't feel like re-inventing the wheel if somebody has a routine
>>>>that does something similar I can adapt. How about it? Has anyone
>>>>had to do anything like this?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>RD

.

Relevant Pages
Loading