dict/hash tables?

[Smorg]

Hi, just returning to autoit for a few quick scripts after not having used it in years...

• Does autoit have a builtin hash table based associative array structure like a Python dict?
• Are functions first-class? Higher order functions supported? lambdas/anonymous functions?
• Do functions have scope for creating closures or are they just "subroutines"? Dynamic scopes (like javascript)?
• Recursion supported?
• Are there any builtin compound datatypes other than the array (lists, tuples, sets, etc)?

I'm basically mapping pixelchecksums to functions or names and wondering if I can put them into a dictionary and look them up efficiently without writing my own binary search tree. Also wondering whether references to functions (hence the second question) can be put in such a structure directly.

[water]

Hi, just returning to autoit for a few quick scripts after not having used it in years...

• Does autoit have a builtin hash table based associative array structure like a Python dict?
• Are functions first-class? Higher order functions supported? lambdas/anonymous functions?
• Do functions have scope for creating closures or are they just "subroutines"? Dynamic scopes (like javascript)?
• Recursion supported?
• Are there any builtin compound datatypes other than the array (lists, tuples, sets, etc)?

I'm basically mapping pixelchecksums to functions or names and wondering if I can put them into a dictionary and look them up efficiently without writing my own binary search tree. Also wondering whether references to functions (hence the second question) can be put in such a structure directly.

• Ad "associative array". Never used it myself but I have seen some threads on the forum. I searched and got a few interesting results.

• Ad "recursion". Yes. "Maximum depth of recursive function calls: 5100 levels" according to the help file (Autoit -> Frequently Asked Questions -> 15. What are the current technical limits of AutoIt v3")

Edited September 16, 2010 by water

[Melba23]

Smorg,

I have asked for this to be moved to the Developer Chat area as I think you are more likely to get an informed response there.

As far as my inexpert replies go:

- 1. No. I use nutster's AssocArray UDF all the time without problem.

- 2. No idea.

- 3. No idea

- 4. Yes.

- 5. No.

M23

[Valik]

Does autoit have a builtin hash table based associative array structure like a Python dict?

No.

Are functions first-class? Higher order functions supported? lambdas/anonymous functions?

No.

Do functions have scope for creating closures or are they just "subroutines"? Dynamic scopes (like javascript)?

You cannot create closures. There are only two visible scopes at any given time, global scope and local (function scope).

Recursion supported?

Limited recursion is supported.

Are there any builtin compound datatypes other than the array (lists, tuples, sets, etc)?

No.

I'm basically mapping pixelchecksums to functions or names and wondering if I can put them into a dictionary and look them up efficiently without writing my own binary search tree. Also wondering whether references to functions (hence the second question) can be put in such a structure directly.

You can dynamically invoke user-defined functions via Call(). Thus, you don't store a reference to the function itself but rather the name.

[Smorg]

- 1. No. I use nutster's AssocArray UDF all the time without problem.

That should do nicely. Performance isn't critical in this case but I might someday run across the need to do bigger lookups.

...

No.

...

You cannot create closures. There are only two visible scopes at any given time, global scope and local (function scope).

Figures having the word "script" in the language name tends to imply "No" . With some (Javascript, Ruby, Python, Perl, Lua, php) having something along those lines, it was worth a shot. Still guessed No since all of the above also have some concept of objects that those features can depend upon to various degrees.

Limited recursion is supported.

Little factorial test just worked

...

No.

Was hoping for something like tuple unpacking mimicked with arrays if needed: foo($bar[1], $bar[2], $bar[3]) -> foo($bar), but it's not too bad to just write a wrapper or use the array directly. Interesting that arrays have predetermined size and recommended to hold homogeneous datatypes making them a cross between "normal" tuples (fixed-length, non-homogeneous, immutable) and "normal" lists (variable-length, homogeneous, mutable).

You can dynamically invoke user-defined functions via Call(). Thus, you don't store a reference to the function itself but rather the name.

Ah I thought that's what byref might be for. Edited September 17, 2010 by Smorg