Post reply

Processing strings.

  • April 30, 2016 at 4:51 pm

    #1875773

    I am on leave right now, but still want to keep you posted with my progress.

    Tackled most of the problems using SQL (T-SQL) only. Processing speed is adequate for what is needed. It's about 80 K a second. I know this is not incredable fast, but for the moment it is sufficient.

    I did try a lot of different scenario's, the following did work the best (Up to now).

    1. Storing intermediate results does speed up the process considerable.

    2. Splitting on the delimiters where you do NOT take account of the textqualifiers.

    3. Reparing the splits when they are between textqualifiers.

    This worked better than first excluding the delimiters which where between textqualifiers. Excluding them takes more time than repairing the splits.

    Thanks all for your time and attention.

    Using SQL works for me, enough speed (although not blazing) and this gives me full control over the process. Previous experience with (experienced) developers which used dot net technologies did give slower results, loads of problems and no total control over the coding.

    Ben

  • May 2, 2016 at 2:26 pm

    #1876041

    Jeff Moden (4/29/2016)

    Nah... the question isn't off topic although I'll certainly agree that it's a sub-topic.

    If a shop forbids VB, it seems to me that they wouldn't allow it to be installed anywhere if it could be excluded from VS. If what you said about the function being available only because of VB being installed, then that function wouldn't be available.

    Are you intentionally being difficult, or are you just reading bits and pieces of what I have been posting? I never said that the function was there due to having VB installed. I said it was a feature of the language, Visual Basic. So in order for .NET to duplicate the functionality offered by Visual Basic (pre-.NET), then it had to include certain items. TextFieldParser happens to be one of those items. That is the reason that the function exists in .NET, but now that it does, it is part of .NET, not part of VB or any particular language. And you can't get rid of that function unless you get rid of the entire .NET Framework. It is just there, generally available to all, regardless of what language one is using. And you don't even need Visual Studio. You should be able to compile .NET assemblies using the command line "csc.exe" and I believe "vbc.exe" (CSharp Compiler and VB Compiler, respectively) without having the IDE installed. In fact, all VS does when it comes to compiling is to put together the correct command line to execute, but it still calls one of those compilers. People writing in F#, VC++, J#, or any other .NET language can make use of the methods contained in Microsoft.VisualBasic.dll. And this DLL is installed on every computer that has the .NET Framework installed, which is pretty much every Windows computer, or at the very least every computer that someone working with Microsoft SQL Server would be using, given that it installs the .NET Framework as a prerequisite component for both the Database Engine as well as the Tools (though they sometimes require different .NET Framework versions).

    Hence, it doesn't matter if a shop does forbid VB, since this DLL and the methods contained within it are still available for anyone to use from any .NET language. Seriously, using this method/function -- TextFieldParser -- implies NOTHING about there being ANY VisualBasic code in a project, or any dependency on VB, or any knowledge required about VB.

    To put it simply: the situation you were originally concerned about does not exist here in any way.

    SQL# — https://SQLsharp.com/ ( SQLCLR library ofover 340 Functions and Procedures)
    Sql Quantum Lift — https://SqlQuantumLift.com/ ( company )
    Sql Quantum Leap — https://SqlQuantumLeap.com/ ( blog )
    Info sites — Collations     •     Module Signing     •     SQLCLR

  • May 2, 2016 at 4:50 pm

    #1876126

    Solomon Rutzky (5/2/2016)

    Are you intentionally being difficult, or are you just reading bits and pieces of what I have been posting?

    I've been wondering the same about you and the seemingly ad hominem tone that you and others have taken along the way but, no... I'm not trying to be difficult. I'm trying to learn and, hopefully, help others learn during the dialog.

    I never said that the function was there due to having VB installed.

    No, but you did say...

    Hence this library exists because Visual Basic includes this functionality, but its usage is not restricted to VB callers.

    ... and so I wondered if the "function" in question would be available to a C# programmer if someone did not install VB as an option of VS or if that was even possible.

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

Viewing 3 posts - 61 through 62 (of 62 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply