There should be a "unique" option on sort . . .

dunbarx at aol.com dunbarx at aol.com
Sat Jan 4 23:54:34 EST 2014


I am with Mark.


And in any case it is simple and fast to delete duplicates, if that is what is desired, in a few lines of code.


The idea of singling out one instance seems more like a job for "filter".


Craig



-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Wieder <mwieder at ahsoftware.net>
To: How to use LiveCode <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com>
Sent: Sat, Jan 4, 2014 8:07 pm
Subject: Re: There should be a "unique" option on sort . . .


> yes, or to only take the first that matches the sort key if sorting by
> other than the full record.

I can see it being slightly useful in certain cases, but it leaves me
feeling a bit queasy. I think it's unsettling enough that the sort
command sorts in place instead of being a function that returns a
sorted copy, and of course it's way too late to change that now. So
deleting items from a dataset while sorting them seems one more step
down that ladder. I do realize that you'd have to specify "unique"
explicitly, but still... if it didn't mess with the original data set
I'd be all over this.

-- 
-Mark Wieder
 ahsoftware at gmail.com


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

 




More information about the Use-livecode mailing list