in reply to sorting problem
The first thing I noticed is an error in your script that would stop it from working correctly (albeit nothing to do with the sort order problem):
$multiple = floor($multiple); #round down to int } else {
That '} else {' does nothing, since it comes after a comment; as a result, all of your "$number"s and "$multiple"s get set to their default values, which is probably not what you want. Just move that clause down to the next line; i.e., it should read
... $multiple = $length / $number; $multiple = floor($multiple); } else { $number = 1; $multiple = $length; } ...
As for the rest of it, I just faked up a bit of a script to test this and fed it a "slice" of the sort you're talking about, and it came out sorted. Example:
#!/usr/bin/perl use warnings; use strict; use POSIX qw/ceil floor/; my $len = shift or die "Need a MAX_LENGTH argument\n"; sub split_Slices { my ($slice_big,$max_length,$overlap)=@_; my @out; for my $slice (@$slice_big){ my ($start, $length, $end, $multiple, $number) = ($slice->{begin}, + $slice->{length}); if($max_length && ($length > $overlap)) { $number = ceil(($length-$overlap) / ($max_length-$overlap)); $multiple = floor($length / $number); } else { $number = 1; $multiple = $length; } for(my $i=0; $i < $number; $i++) { $end = $start + $multiple + $overlap; push @out, { begin => $start, end => $end }; $start += $multiple + 1; } } return \@out; } my @stuff; push @stuff, { begin => $_ * 10, length => 10 } for 0..9; my $ret = split_Slices(\@stuff, $len, 0); use Data::Dumper; print Dumper($ret);
Running it with a couple of different arguments produces the following:
./slicer 10 $VAR1 = [ { 'begin' => 0, 'end' => 10 }, { 'begin' => 10, 'end' => 20 }, { 'begin' => 20, 'end' => 30 }, { 'begin' => 30, 'end' => 40 }, { 'begin' => 40, 'end' => 50 }, { 'begin' => 50, 'end' => 60 }, { 'begin' => 60, 'end' => 70 }, { 'begin' => 70, 'end' => 80 }, { 'begin' => 80, 'end' => 90 }, { 'begin' => 90, 'end' => 100 } ];
./slicer 5 $VAR1 = [ { 'begin' => 0, 'end' => 5 }, { 'begin' => 6, 'end' => 11 }, { 'begin' => 10, 'end' => 15 }, { 'begin' => 16, 'end' => 21 }, { 'begin' => 20, 'end' => 25 }, { 'begin' => 26, 'end' => 31 }, { 'begin' => 30, 'end' => 35 }, { 'begin' => 36, 'end' => 41 }, { 'begin' => 40, 'end' => 45 }, { 'begin' => 46, 'end' => 51 }, { 'begin' => 50, 'end' => 55 }, { 'begin' => 56, 'end' => 61 }, { 'begin' => 60, 'end' => 65 }, { 'begin' => 66, 'end' => 71 }, { 'begin' => 70, 'end' => 75 }, { 'begin' => 76, 'end' => 81 }, { 'begin' => 80, 'end' => 85 }, { 'begin' => 86, 'end' => 91 }, { 'begin' => 90, 'end' => 95 }, { 'begin' => 96, 'end' => 101 } ];
So it seems that the sorting part of it works fine (although I'd take a closer look at that overlap routine.) Perhaps you should examine the data being fed to it.
-- Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. -- W. B. Yeats
|
|---|