Fusion Control Centre MDX Suggestions, Bugs, and Comments

**2k1Toaster** · 09-03-2008, 01:56 AM

Fixed UpClick error, wont be public until next major release as there are "under the hood" changes going on too.

**h3rk** · 09-03-2008, 01:59 AM

I think the press-hold thing I'm doing, if it can be an option of the button itself would be beneficial. Since it's using a lot of xml space.

Also maybe a function for If X is a multiple of Y, would condense my xml greatly. Thoughts?

**2k1Toaster** · 09-03-2008, 02:06 AM

Originally Posted by h3rk

I think the press-hold thing I'm doing, if it can be an option of the button itself would be beneficial. Since it's using a lot of xml space.

Possible, but it would be hard to make that generic. This will take some thought to do generically.

Also maybe a function for If X is a multiple of Y, would condense my xml greatly. Thoughts?

Like modulo?

**h3rk** · 09-03-2008, 02:11 AM

Originally Posted by 2k1Toaster

Possible, but it would be hard to make that generic. This will take some thought to do generically.

Yeah, I'll play with it for a while first.

Originally Posted by 2k1Toaster

Like modulo?

Wait, that get's me back in the pitfall I was in before, not looking for ranges. Nevermind.

Ok there's two that I will take back. I'll have more soon, and hopefully more useful.

**2k1Toaster** · 09-03-2008, 02:14 AM

Perhaps a "between" function. Would cut the code dramatically. Instead of 3 modules with greather than, less than, and OR, it would be 1 module with 3 inputs.

I mean this can be done with a regular MDX function, but if doing thousands of parses, might be easier to do in compiled code.

**h3rk** · 09-03-2008, 02:18 AM

remember that compare5 function that I made, it gave me errors, and I couldn't figure it out, so I refrained from using custom functions like that for logical reasons, and just stuck to signal processing purposes.

I figured a between version would be the same way. I'll try it out. But maybe there's something wrong there.

**h3rk** · 09-03-2008, 03:43 AM

Originally Posted by h3rk

I don't think that I've ever seen the pushed state while pushing a button in MDX. I've been using some pretty distinct colors, just to be certain, but I have yet to see it.

I don't think I saw this one on your list. I've never got this to work.

**Dan2008** · 09-03-2008, 07:39 AM

Originally Posted by 2k1Toaster

Perhaps a "between" function. Would cut the code dramatically. Instead of 3 modules with greather than, less than, and OR, it would be 1 module with 3 inputs.

I mean this can be done with a regular MDX function, but if doing thousands of parses, might be easier to do in compiled code.

Would using LINQ make something like this easier on the coding end of it? You would have all of the SQL query functionality (like between) with the convenience of being data source independent. It works on any XML or SQL data source.

**2k1Toaster** · 09-03-2008, 09:47 AM

It is not the data storage that is a problem, it parsing an unknown command at any point in an unknown function to do a generic action. Because you can pretty much build code in MDX, I have put no restrictions on when or where or how often or even the order in which things are calculated. This makes it a powerful beast but is hard to fit the model.

And SQL queries would be slower than querying a static List in the program's own memory already.

I am thinking that I need to build some sort of string to integer lookup table. It will parse the logic 1 time, figure out the order it needs to do things, and then use a lookup table after that and not the xml. This would be blazing fast, but also a PITA to code. I have never done anything like that.

**Dan2008** · 09-03-2008, 10:18 AM

I didn't mean to change the data source to a SQL database, just use LINQ for the internal queries. Since LINQ is data source independent it can work on a datalist in memory just as well as it can on an XML or SQL data source.

By using SQL-style queries you can more easily order the data in any way that you need.

Once queries are coded in LINQ you can change data sources without having to change any code other than your data source definition. That's what makes LINQ so powerful (and cool).