Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Keep It Simple, Stupid
 
PerlMonks  

Comment on

( #3333=superdoc: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

Day 1: There's a driver table that has four columns. (note: that's a lie, but a useful one.)

External_Name External_Value Internal_Name Internal_Value
I retrieve rather a lot of data from someplace. It comes in with External Name and Value fields. But we don't want to deal with the 'External_*' values. Instead they need to be translated to their internal equivalents. For instance we could have:
External_Name External_Value Internal_Name Internal_Value GLD_SPT PX_VALUE Gold Price AXXX111 PX_VALUE Frob Spread
and a data row would some in with "GLD_SPT,PX_VALUE" and I need to translate those to "Gold,Price" before sending the data down the pipe line.

But I REALLY don't want to be tagging the database for every row as I iterate across the set (which notably does NOT come from a database.) It's remarkably stupid given the volume. No problem, preload.

So I preloaded a hash with the following(ish.)

$Name_Resolver{lc("$External_Name|$External_Value")} = $Internal_Name;
and it actually works surprisingly well. For every row of data I get, I smack together a composite key and resolve it to Internal Name. The lookup table is prefetched. All happy nice nice.

Day 2: You should've seen this coming because it always happens to you. Yeah ok. But we need Internal_Value now as well....by tomorrow.

Ok, "by tomorrow" means add a parallel "%Value_Resolver" with the same composite string key that resolves to Internal_Value. It (of course) prefetches on the same load as the other hash.

And... sure. It works. But the whole approach makes me want to disavow it. The right "value" should be a simple list (or sub-hash? seems unnecessary) containing both values. But using a "two strings smacked together" key just seems wrong. I'm just not sure what would ACTUALLY be simpler (for values of 'simpler' approximating "easier for a programmer to understand.")

I'm in the peculiar position of being able to spend a (very) little time refactoring this code and cleaning it up a bit.

Thoughts?

EDIT: Been a while. I forget people can't read my mind for the rest of the context on these things. Hopefully this is a bit more clear.


In reply to A question of style: Composite keys to multiple values by Voronich

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":



  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.
  • Log In?
    Username:
    Password:

    What's my password?
    Create A New User
    Chatterbox?
    and the web crawler heard nothing...

    How do I use this? | Other CB clients
    Other Users?
    Others rifling through the Monastery: (4)
    As of 2015-07-06 00:21 GMT
    Sections?
    Information?
    Find Nodes?
    Leftovers?
      Voting Booth?

      The top three priorities of my open tasks are (in descending order of likelihood to be worked on) ...









      Results (68 votes), past polls