[VM/values/comparison] add `<`/`>` support for Binary values

[github-actions[bot]]

[VM/values/comparison] add </> support for Binary values currently, = is supported but not < and >! Preferrably, the implementation should go to values/custom/vbinary and then integrate it here. see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139

https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/blob/269a723e23971f7c5ba310f6c3539852a6f016e3/src/vm/values/comparison.nim#L265

#  labels: critical,bug,values,easy

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) add `<`/`>` support for Attribute values
#  currently, `=` is supported but not `<` and `>`!
#  the logic should be the same as with normal strings/words/etc
#  see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139
#  labels: bug,values,easy

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) add `<`/`>` support for AttributeLabel values
#  currently, `=` is supported but not `<` and `>`!
#  the logic should be the same as with normal strings/words/etc
#  see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139
#  labels: bug,values,easy

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) how should we handle Dictionary values?
#  right now, both `<` and `>` simply return false
#  but is it even a normal idea to compare a Dictionary with something else, or
#  another dictionary for that matter?
#  How do other languages (e.g. Ruby, Python) handle this?
#  If the final decision is to not support this, then we should throw an appropriate
#  error message (e.g. "cannot compare Dictionary values"), along with an appropriate
#  (new) error template at VM/errors
#  see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139
#  labels: enhancement,values,error handling,open discussion

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) how should we handle Object values?
#  right now, Object make feature a custom `compare` method which is called an used
#  for the comparison. However, if there is no such method, we end up having the exact
#  same issues we have with Dictionaries. So, how is that to be dealt with?
#  see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139
#  labels: enhancement,values,error handling,open discussion

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) add `<`/`>` support for Path values?
#  currently, `=` is supported but not `<` and `>`!
#  the logic should be the same as with blocks, as it's - internally -
#  technically the exact same thing.
#  But then again, it seems a bit weird as a notion. Any ideas?
#  see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139
#  labels: bug,values,open discussion

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) add `<`/`>` support for PathLabel values?
#  currently, `=` is supported but not `<` and `>`!
#  the logic should be the same as with blocks, as it's - internally -
#  technically the exact same thing.
#  But then again, it seems a bit weird as a notion. Any ideas?
#  see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139
#  labels: bug,values,open discussion

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) add `<`/`>` support for Regex values?
#  currently, `=` is supported but not `<` and `>`!
#  Another tricky one: the logic should be either the same as with strings,
#  or disallow comparison altogether and throw an error.
#  In the first case, since Regex values encapsulate a VRegex object (from values/custom/vregex)
#  the ideal implementation would be done there (adding a `>` and `<` operator to VRegex)
#  and then link the method here :-)
#  labels: bug,values,open discussion

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) add `<`/`>` support for Binary values
#  currently, `=` is supported but not `<` and `>`!
#  Preferrably, the implementation should go to values/custom/vbinary
#  and then integrate it here.
#  see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139
#  labels: bug,values,easy

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) add `<`/`>` support for Range values
#  currently, `=` is supported but not `<` and `>`!
#  Preferrably, the implementation should go to values/custom/vrange
#  and then integrate it here.
#  The question is: when is range A smaller than range B? How do other
#  languages handle this?
#  see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139
#  labels: bug,values,open discussion

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) add `<`/`>` support for Inline values?
#  currently, `=` is supported but not `<` and `>`!
#  since Inline values are pretty much identical to Block values - internally -
#  comparison operators should work for them in an identical fashion.
#  The question is: when is Inline A smaller than Inline B? How do other
#  languages handle this?
#  see also: https://github.com/arturo-lang/arturo/pull/1139
#  labels: bug,values,open discussion

# TODO(VM/values/comparison) Re-visit/test handling of Block comparisons
#  How do other languages (e.g. Python, Ruby, etc) handle comparisons between blocks/arrays?
#  Do they even support it? If so, how?
#  labels: enhancement,values,open discussion,unit-test

proc `<`*(x: Value, y: Value): bool {.inline.}=
    if x.kind in {Integer, Floating, Rational} and y.kind in {Integer, Floating, Rational}:
        if x.kind==Integer:

a8557c13f4142938288329165fb14d20ee5b121f

[RickBarretto]

I have more questions than suggestions for this:

How should it work? Converting a binary to integer? If yes, should this integer be signed or unsigned? What should happen if my binary's size is other than a multiple of 2, let me say, 3 bits, for instance?

[drkameleon]

The :binary type in Arturo is actually a Block of bytes. And... every byte is just that a byte, or 8 bits. (In general, you may access an individual bit, but you cannot define anything, a concrete value, as having "3 bits"... everything, structurally has to be a multiple of 8 bits or a byte)

Now, that being said, and given that the underlying values are actually bytes (that is an unsigned 8-bit int: https://nim-lang.org/docs/system.html#byte), what would make sense for </> testing would be to sequentially compare the individual bytes.

So,... with a: [10 11 12 13 14] and b: [10 20 12 23 23], I'd think of sth like:

• compare the first element of A with the first element of B
• they're equal, so let's move on
• compare the secodn element of A with the second element of B
• a[1] < b[1], so I guess this would mean a < b

And this wouldn't be related to the bytearray sizes at all.

In any case, if you want to have a look into how other languages deal with it, there could be something we are missing 😉

[RickBarretto]

So,... with a: [10 11 12 13 14] and b: [10 20 12 23 23], I'd think of sth like:

• compare the first element of A with the first element of B
• they're equal, so let's move on
• compare the secodn element of A wi th the second element of B
• a[1] < b[1], so I guess this would mean a < b

I'm curious now, should it work with the same process for blocks and inlines?

[RickBarretto]

And this wouldn't be related to the bytearray sizes at all.

Got it! Thanks for the explanation!

In any case, if you want to have a look into how other languages deal with it, there could be something we are missing 😉

All right!

[stale[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[stale[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.