inequality

I need to pass inequalities to a function for evaluation within the function. Is there a way to evaluation the inequality if passed as a string? Or must I pass a representation of the inequality and use if/else statements to generate the sign? senderle Your question is a little vague, but it sounds like you want to evaluate a string containing an expression (such as x > 5 ). Rather than doing that, which is unnecessarily complex, and potentially a security hazard, just define a function, either in the conventional way or using lambda. def gt5(x): return x > 5 or gt5 = lambda x: x > 5 These are

Im trying to display rows which does not exist from the other table using LINQ. can anyone help me? Here is the sql im using. select * from table1 left join table2 on table1.col1 = table2.col1 and table1.col2 = table2.col2 where table2.col1 is null and table2.col2 is null Already searched and found some solution. Here is what i did so far. from t1 in table1 where !(from t2 in table1 join t3 in table2 on new { t2.col1, t2.col2 } equals new { t3.col1, t3.col2 } select t2.PK).Contains(t1.PK) select t1 The above code works well but im just wondering if that is the only solution i can use? I mean,

I have a (simplified) table that is structured like so: Table: ItemData PK | ItemID | StoreFK | Retail 1 | 100101 | 1 | 4.99 4 | 100101 | 2 | 4.99 7 | 100101 | 3 | 0.99 2 | 100102 | 1 | 6.99 5 | 100102 | 2 | 6.99 8 | 100102 | 3 | 6.99 3 | 100103 | 1 | 7.99 6 | 100103 | 2 | 8.99 9 | 100103 | 3 | 9.99 I would like to return all the items that have a different retail at one or more stores: Returns: ItemID 100101 100103 Item 100101 has a lower retail at store 3 then at store 1 & 2 it is returned. Item 100103 has a different retail at each store location so it is returned. Item 100102 has equality

I've reduced my problem (table layout algorithm) to the following problem: Imagine I have N variables X 1 , X 2 , ..., X N . I also have some (undetermined) number of inequalities, like: X 1 >= 2 x 2 + X 3 >= 13 etc. Each inequalities is a sum of one or more variables, and it is always compared to a constant by using the >= operator. I cannot say in advance how many inequalities I will have each time, but all the variables have to be non-negative, so that's already one for each variable. How to solve this system in such a way, that the values of the variables are as small as possible? Added:

This question already has an answer here: Python not equal operator 4 answers Perhaps this is a rather newbie-ish question, but I'm curious. I have tried searching for it, but I suppose I lack the correct terminology to search properly. Difference between != and <> . On searching again, "inequality", I found one that discusses not == and != , but nothing about <> . In Python 2.x, <> is equivalent to != , as described in the documentation : The forms <> and != are equivalent; for consistency with C, != is preferred; where != is mentioned below <> is also accepted. The <> spelling is considered

I am trying to set members of an array that are below a threshold to nan. This is part of a QA/QC process and the incoming data may already have slots that are nan. So as an example my threshold might be -1000 and hence I would want to set -3000 to nan in the following array x = np.array([np.nan,1.,2.,-3000.,np.nan,5.]) This following: x[x < -1000.] = np.nan produces the correct behavior, but also a RuntimeWarning, but the overhead of disabling the warning warnings.filterwarnings("ignore") ... warnints.resetwarnings() is kind of heavy an potentially a bit unsafe. Trying to index twice with

I know that the value itself for a RowVersion column is not in and of itself useful, except that it changes each time the row is updated. However, I was wondering if they are useful for relative (inequality) comparison. If I have a table with a RowVersion column, are either of the following true: Will all updates that occur simultaneously (either same update statement or same transaction) have the same value in the RowVersion column? If I do update "A", followed by update "B", will the rows involved in update "B" have a higher value than the rows involved in update "A"? Thanks. From MSDN :