Skip to main content
K
kingquattro
Participating Frequently
December 19, 2012
解決済み

Possible bug while implementing recursion

  • December 19, 2012
  • 返信数 2.
  • 935 ビュー

Hey,

     Either I am going complete nuts and not seing the most obvious mistake or there is really a bug, hope someone can help.  I have a herirachical xml document that I would like to flatten out.  I wrote a cfm code and it works perfectly, but when I put them logic in cfscript it does not work.   From what I can tell, when recursion returns back, and continues on, the old value in the loop is overwritten (counter value is not what it should be when the state was saved and recursion took place). I don't know how else to explain this.   Here is code in cfm and in cfscript, can you see something I am not? 

function flattenXML works just fine, but flattenXML2 does not.

[code]

<cfset xmlfile = "/xDocs/TAXONOMY_XMLDOC_131.xml" />

<cfset myDoc = xmlParse(xmlfile) />

<cfset theRootElement = myDoc.XmlRoot>

<cfdump var="#theRootElement.XMLChildren[1]#"/>

<cfset st = flatternXML2(theRootElement, "", structNew())/>

<cfdump var="#st#"/>

<cffunction name="flatternXML" access="private" returntype="struct">

<cfargument name="node" type="xml" required="true">

<cfargument name="str" type="string" required="true">

<cfargument name="lineage" type="struct" required="true" >

 

          <cfset t_name="NONE"/>

 

          <cfif structKeyExists(arguments.node.XmlAttributes, "NAME")>

                    <cfset t_name = arguments.node.XmlAttributes['NAME']/>

</cfif>

 

          <cfif len(arguments.str)>

                    <cfset arguments.str &= "; " & left(arguments.node.XmlName, 1) & "_" & t_name/> 

<cfelse>

                    <cfset arguments.str = left(arguments.node.XmlName, 1) & "_" & t_name/>

</cfif>

 

          <cfif ArrayLen(arguments.node.XmlChildren) eq 0>

                    <!---<cfoutput>#arguments.str#</cfoutput></br>--->

 

                    <cfset hash_key = hash(arguments.str, "MD5")/>

                    <cfif not structKeyExists(arguments.lineage, hash_key)>

                              <cfset structInsert(arguments.lineage, hash_key, arguments.str)/>

  <cfelse>

                              <cfoutput>duplicate lineage #arguments.str#<br/></cfoutput>

  </cfif>

 

                    <cfreturn arguments.lineage/>

</cfif>

 

<cfloop from="1" to="#arraylen(arguments.node.XmlChildren)#" index="i">

                    <cfset arguments.lineage = flatternXML(arguments.node.XmlChildren, arguments.str, arguments.lineage)/>

</cfloop>

 

          <cfreturn arguments.lineage/>

</cffunction>

<cffunction name="flatternXML2" access="private" returntype="struct">

<cfargument name="node" type="xml" required="true">

<cfargument name="str" type="string" required="true">

<cfargument name="lineage" type="struct" required="true" >

 

<cfscript>

                    //set name and prefix, of the current node

                    t_name = "NONE";

 

                    if (structKeyExists(arguments.node.XmlAttributes, "NAME"))

                              t_name = arguments.node.XmlAttributes['NAME'];

 

                    if (len(arguments.str))

                              arguments.str &= "; " & left(arguments.node.XmlName, 1) & "_" & t_name;

  else

                              arguments.str = left(arguments.node.XmlName, 1) & "_" & t_name;

 

                    //recursion end condition

                    if (arraylen(arguments.node.XmlChildren) eq 0) {

                              writeoutput(arguments.str & "</br>");

 

                              hash_key = hash(arguments.str, "MD5");

                              if (not structKeyExists(arguments.lineage, hash_key))

                                        structInsert(arguments.lineage, hash_key, arguments.str);

  else

                                        writeoutput("duplicate lineage: " & arguments.str & "<br/>");

 

                              return(arguments.lineage);

                    }

 

                    for(j=1; j lte arraylen(arguments.node.XmlChildren); j=j+1){

                              writeoutput("before " & j & "_" & arraylen(arguments.node.XmlChildren) & "<br/>");

                              arguments.lineage = flatternXML2(arguments.node.XmlChildren, arguments.str, arguments.lineage);

                              writeoutput("after " & j & "_" & arraylen(arguments.node.XmlChildren) & "<br/>");

                    }

 

                    return(arguments.lineage);

</cfscript>

 

</cffunction>

[/code]

    このトピックへの返信は締め切られました。
    解決に役立った回答 Adam Cameron.

    At first glance (it's too much code to wade through thoroughly), you're not VARing any of your variables in your function. You must do this at the best of times for the sake of good practices and stability of code, but with recursive functionality it's essential.

    --

    Adam

    返信数 2

    BKBK
    Community Expert
    BKBKCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    December 19, 2012

    To help you with another pair of eyes, I will just translate the tag version into a script. You can then compare. Here it is:

    <cfscript>

    var t_name="NONE";

    var output="";

    var hash_key="";

    var updatedStr="";

    var updatedLineage=structNew();

    var returnStruct=structNew();

    updatedStr = arguments.str;

    updatedLineage = arguments.lineage;

    if (structKeyExists(arguments.node.XmlAttributes, "NAME")) {

        t_name = arguments.node.XmlAttributes['NAME'];

    }

    if (len(updatedStr)) {

        updatedStr &= "; " & left(arguments.node.XmlName, 1) & "_" & t_name;

    }

    else

        updatedStr = left(arguments.node.XmlName, 1) & "_" & t_name;

    if (ArrayLen(arguments.node.XmlChildren) eq 0) {

         //output=output & updatedStr & "<br/>";

        hash_key = hash(updatedStr, "MD5");

        if (not structKeyExists(updatedLineage, hash_key)) {

            structInsert(updatedLineage, hash_key, updatedStr);

        }

        else

        //output=output & "duplicate lineage: " & updatedStr & "<br/>";

    }

    //returnStruct.output=output;

    //returnStruct.updatedLineage=updatedLineage;

    for (i=1; i LTE arraylen(arguments.node.XmlChildren); i=i+1) {

        updatedLineage = flatternXML(arguments.node.XmlChildren, updatedStr, updatedLineage);

        //updatedLineage = flatternXML(arguments.node.XmlChildren, updatedStr, updatedLineage).updatedLineage;

    }

    return updatedLineage;

    // return returnStruct;

    </cfscript>

    It is good practice to leave variables in the arguments scope unmodified during the processing of a function. Modifying them increases complexity. This comes into play when you maintain the code later, as we are now doing here. The solution is obvious. Just define a new updatable variable. In this case, updatedStr and updatedLineage.

    You will also notice I have commented out all display statements. It is bad practice to make a function do more than one thing at once. The function returns a variable. It should therefore not have the added burden of writing output. If you wish to return output plus some other result(s), then store them in a struct and return that.

    K
    kingquattro作成者
    Participating Frequently
    December 19, 2012

    Thanks Adam, BKBK. 

    Adam you were right about VARing.  I have a nasty habbit of not VARing my variables, and <cfset...> does that, hence the reason why cfm code was wroking but not cfscript.  I have initiated all varaibles and function is producing expected results.

    BKBK, the display statements were there as part of my debugging process.

    Thanks a bunch.

    A
    Adam Cameron.
    Inspiring
    December 19, 2012

    Adam you were right about VARing.  I have a nasty habbit of not VARing my variables, and <cfset...> does that, hence the reason why cfm code was wroking but not cfscript.

    I don't get what you mean. <cfset> does nothing different that a script variable assignment. To VAR a function-location variables, one needs to specify the VAR keyword in either way.

    EG:

    <cfset var foo = "bar">

    var foo = "bar";

    (or just use the local scope as of CF9).

    --

    Adam

    A
    Adam Cameron.解決！
    Inspiring
    December 19, 2012

    At first glance (it's too much code to wade through thoroughly), you're not VARing any of your variables in your function. You must do this at the best of times for the sake of good practices and stability of code, but with recursive functionality it's essential.

    --

    Adam

    Firefly Community Gallery
    Adobe Firefly

    Remix with Firefly Community Gallery

    Thousands of free creations to fall in love with and remix in Firefly.

    Explore now
    契約条件Accessibility statement
    Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices