Re: [bug-gawk] gawk 5.0.1 patch to allow *valid* awk variable names to be assigned to SYMTAB

[Andrew J. Schorr]

Hi Peter,

You can certainly create your own fork of gawk and add a new extension
into the extensions subdirectory, but I suspect that Arnold would
be very unlikely to accept this change into the core distribution unless
it was a vital feature that was essential for typical gawk users.
But it's his call as the maintainer...

My sense is that the CSV extension has stalled, but I could be confused,
as I have not been monitoring it closely.

The gawkextlib project provides a template for how to create a new extension.
The gawk distro does not, because it's not in the business of accepting
new extensions. :-)

Regards,
Andy

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 08:06:51PM -0400, address@hidden wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> 
> I did look at the gawkextlib project code base for csv, but that seems a bit
> beyond what I need on a more immediate basis.  I like what I saw, but for
> the moment I would like to try something simpler.
> 
> (P.S. -- Is Manuel no longer working on that csv project?  I remember him
> from too many years ago when we both were active on the DJGPP project.)
> 
> Back to this subject.  Is it possible to simply introduce a new C source
> program into the gawk/extensions sub-directory and somehow just use a make
> of gawk itself to find and compile and bind the new program into the
> extensions library?
> 
> I am assuming here that I will be able to craft a new C source from the
> existing models in the gawk/extensions sub-directory fairly quickly for the
> simple function(s) I envision at the moment.
> 
> If so, what additional files besides the C source itself need to be
> updated/created in the gawk/extensions sub-directory to allow this to happen
> seamlessly?  Also, how does one go about adding tests for new C source
> function(s)?
> 
> Apologies for my vast ignorance here, but I am trying to learn as I go
> along.
> 
> Peter
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew J. Schorr <address@hidden>
> > Sent: Monday, October 21, 2019 7:25 AM
> > To: address@hidden
> > Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden
> > Subject: Re: [bug-gawk] gawk 5.0.1 patch to allow *valid* awk variable
> names
> > to be assigned to SYMTAB
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > A few points:
> > 
> > 1. Tom's suggestion involves more typing than necessary. The example
> below:
> >       FNR == 1 { for (i = 1; i <= NF; i++) mem[$i] = i }
> >       $(mem["Name"]) ~ /^H/ { process H.* records }
> >       $(mem("Amount"]) < 0 { process negative amount records }
> > 
> > can be rewritten as (and I use this approach all the time):
> >    NR == 1 {
> >       for (i = 1; i <= NF; i++)
> >      m[$i] = i
> >       next
> >    }
> > 
> >    $m["Name"] ~ /^H/ { process H.* records }
> >    $m["Amount"] < 0 { process negative amount records }
> > 
> > This saves 4 characters per variable reference (mem -> m, and no need for
> the
> > parentheses), so reduces the overhead by almost 50% (9 -> 5). :-)
> > 
> > So yeah, it costs you a bit of typing, but it's so much cleaner than
> mucking with
> > SYMTAB.
> > 
> > 2. If the goal here is really to process CSV files, then there's a
> gawkextlib project
> > to develop a CSV processing extension that could probably benefit from
> some
> > development/contributions.
> > 
> > 3. If you develop your own extension, you are welcome to contribute it to
> the
> > gawkextlib project.
> >    http://gawkextlib.sourceforge.net/
> >    https://sourceforge.net/projects/gawkextlib/
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Andy
> > 
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 01:50:32AM -0400, address@hidden wrote:
> > > Apologies for forgetting to CC the list for the last two iterations of
> > > this discussion.  I am correcting that mistake with this reply.
> > >
> > > Arnold,
> > >
> > > I understand your lack of enthusiasm, particularly after seeing the
> > > unexpected and undesired results when I tried to actually use my
> > > proposed update.
> > >
> > > After having reviewed the manual documentation of the gawk extension
> > > API, I tend to agree that what I want to do is most easily done in a
> > > new extension function.
> > >
> > > There do appear to be several of the delivered extension function
> > > sources I could use as a model for a relatively simple extension
> > > function that satisfies my use case.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your understanding, guidance, and genuine consideration
> > > of my needs.
> > >
> > > If I get such an extension operating correctly and robustly, is there
> > > any interest in my contributing that extension to the project?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Peter
> <Snipped> 
> > --
> > Andrew Schorr
> --
> 

-- 
Andrew Schorr                      e-mail: address@hidden
Telemetry Investments, L.L.C.      phone:  917-305-1748
545 Fifth Ave, Suite 1108          fax:    212-425-5550
New York, NY 10017-3630