Wikifunctions:Project chat/Archive/2024/01

From Wikifunctions


Newsletter #137: Introducing our first new type: Lists

The newsletter introducing our first new types can be found on Meta. Feel free to discuss here! And Happy New Year! --DVrandecic (WMF) (talk) 23:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Been waiting on that for months. I guess it's a good time to come back to Wikifunctions, as lists are a whole new Eldorado: sorting algorithms, easier implementations in Composition and better ways to handle inputs! Poslovitch (talk) 00:11, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #137 is out: Introducing our first new type: Lists

There is a new update for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!

In this issue, we introduce our newest and much requested type of function, list. Also, we take a look at the latest software developments.

Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check our archive!

Also, we remind you that if you have questions or ideas to discuss, the next Volunteers' Corner will be held on January 8, at 18:30 UTC (link to the meeting).

Enjoy the reading! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 10:37, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #138 is out: The Joy of Collaboration; Introducing the Function of the Week: reverse string

There is a new update for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!

In this issue, we present you an essay from Denny and we introduce a new section of the newsletter, dedicated to the "function of the week". Also, we take a look at the latest software developments.

Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check our archive!

We also wanted to note that we are in the process of moving the Updates from Meta to Wikifunctions. We'll keep you updated about it.

Enjoy the reading! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 12:27, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Informing you about the Mental Health Resource Center and inviting any comments you may have

Hello all! I work in the Community Resilience and Sustainability team of the Wikimedia Foundation. The Mental Health Resource Center is a group of pages on Meta-wiki aimed at supporting the mental wellbeing of users in our community.

The Mental Health Resource Center launched in August 2023. The goal is to review the comments and suggestions to improve the Mental Health Resource Center each quarter. As there have not been many comments yet, I’d like to invite you to provide comments and resource suggestions as you are able to do so on the Mental Health Resource Center talk page. The hope is this resource expands over time to cover more languages and cultures. Thank you! Best, JKoerner (WMF) (talk) 21:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #139 is out: Refreshing the Function page; Function of the Week: ROT13

There is a new update for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!

In this issue, we announce a redesign and rewrite of the Function page and we present our first "function of the week". Also, we take a look at the latest software developments.

Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check our archive!

Enjoy the reading! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 12:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

French function

Hello, I discover this wikimedia project, bravo! Two questions

Bouzinac (talk) 15:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, @Bouzinac! The function implementations are indeed viewable (and as far as I know editable) for any users. Wikifunctions by design split the function itself and its implementations (there can be multiple). French regular plural (Z11548) is just a function definition (i.e. what inputs does it take, what is its return type). If you head to the details tab on that page, you'll see a list of implementations and test cases. Every such entity is a separate page. The said function has one implementation, French plural, Python (Z11550) in Python. You should be able to view it and maybe able to edit as well. (The interface, especially it being split into two tabs, may change in future, so that the implementations might be available on the same page where the general info is).
Regarding the question to ask for an improvement, I'm not sure how to answer. Certainly, one of possibilities is to create a new implementation that does better and add some test cases to reflect that. But I don't think it's the best way to do it (or maybe it is, depending on assumptions how Wikifuntions should work). In theory, the execution software should pick the correct implementation out of available ones (but I don't know if it already implemented). Msz2001 (talk) 16:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #140 is out: Getting debug information from code; Function of the Week: Wrap string

There is a new update for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!

In this issue, we discuss debugging in implementations and we present our new "function of the week". Also, we take a look at the latest software developments.

Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check our archive!

Enjoy the reading! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 10:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Sannita (WMF) (talk) 11:28, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Functions and implementations versioning

Given the previous section about the grandfather clause, is it possible to imagine being able to use a version of an implementation's history? It seems terribly flawed to me, but the question begs to be asked. Perhaps it's more desirable to be able to use a version of a function than of an implementation? Lofhi (talk) 05:15, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it's intended or not (perhaps yes), but at the moment you are able to run an older version of an implementation. For example, go to: https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/Z10331?oldid=30878 (this is a flawed version of implication which for true and true yields incorrectly false). Interestingly, test cases are run using the current version of that implementation.
Running an older version of a function does not make much sense to me. Eventually, functions (that is function definitions) should be stable not to break them for people who used the old function. Msz2001 (talk) 09:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

How to respect the grandfather clause?

The more time you take to take an interest in the project, the more you realize the difficulties that lie ahead. Does the grandfather clause have to be respected to the full with testing? But if so, who chooses the rules behind the specification of each function? By example, I am really not sure that the Python and Javascript implementations behind Trim String (Z10079) will always return the same result. What's a whitespace for both languages? Does it also take line terminators into account? Should theses differences be kept or fixed? Lofhi (talk) 05:13, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Those are great questions! My suggestion would be that once we have tests that show that two implementations behave differently, we should either drop one of the implementations, or we should split the function in two. We should not keep implementations that behave differently, but fix them. --Denny (talk) 23:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Linking to the code for Built-in-functions

I have looked at the Javascript-File in Gitlab what includes as far as I understand the definitions for Built-in-functions. You can find this file here. From my point of view it is interesting to see also for built-in-functions how they work. What do you think about setting a link to the code file in the banner already visible in Built-in-functions. I have not found a template for this on the wiki. At the moment it is from my point of view very difficult to find the definitions of built-in-functions in Wikifunctions. Hogü-456 (talk) 21:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like a fine idea. It would be great to have an approach that doesn't increase maintenance work in case of refactorings or code changes. Not sure how simple that is. --23:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC) DVrandecic (WMF) (talk) 23:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Generating SPARQL and SPARQL fragment, perspectives ?

Hi, it’s early to talk about that, but I’m starting to work on a Wikidata query gadget based on SPARQL fragments, (see d:Help:Partial query on Wikidata for what kind of fragments are already available).

The assumption is that these kind of fragment may offer a higher level way for users to query Wikidata. I’m starting a user interface to build query based on this. A fragment is a template with parameters, a query built with fragment, simple version, could be a list of fragment with parameters. (For example a list of criteria : ?item has an article in enwikipedia ; ?item was a state president in 1900 ; ?spouse was the spouse of ?item in 1800)

Currently the fragments are templates, but I think that in the future they could very well become wikifunctions … It could even be a usecase for abstract content, query generation based on high level descriptors ? TomT0m (talk) 13:51, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Please can someone help me write a composition for this? I tried, using If (Z802), Is empty list (Z813) (once as a condition on returning false, and then once to wrap around list without first element (Z812) for the final answer), but I got an obscure key-ID error, and I'm not sure if I got something wrong or if there is a bug. --99of9 (talk) 09:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I also just got a similar error when trying to write a recursive composition for concatenate lists (Z12767) using prepend element to list (Z810) first element (Z811) list without first element (Z812) Is empty list (Z813) and reverse list (Z12668). It might be something related to passing a list argument as an argument reference. --99of9 (talk) 11:25, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Generic list equality check: [Z503/Not implemented yet]

I am in love, and new, but in love, but confused. What does it even mean? [Z503/Not implemented yet]. I was trying to implement some generic list equality check. Z12673 is the function, Z12674 is the implementation, ["abc", "ab", "a", "abcd", "1", "12"] sorted is [ "a", "1", "ab", "12", "abc", "abcd" ] (Z12675) is the broken test used in sort a list by string length (Z12671). Got ["Z1","a","1","ab","12","abc","abcd"] !== ["Z6","a","1","ab","12","abc","abdc"]. Why Z1 and Z6 are even added to the lists? Lofhi (talk) 07:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

I know that List equality (Z889) exists, but I wanted to try an implementation of it. Guess we can delete it when someone explains me these Z1 added ones! Lofhi (talk) 07:34, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
The first element of typed list seem indeed to be the type of the list...? Does it mean that the first element of a Typed list (Z881) is the type of the list... or the real first element of the list? first element (Z811) built-in function exists for this reason? Lofhi (talk) 07:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Lofhi:! Welcome to the project, and sorry that it is still a bit confusing. Happy to help.

The no connected implementation yet (Z503) error comes up because the test ["abc", "ab", "a", "abcd", "1", "12"] sorted is [ "a", "1", "ab", "12", "abc", "abcd" ] (Z12675) uses the function Z12673, which has no implementation connected yet. So when the test case runs, the system doesn't know what to do, and says there's no implementation yet.

Whereas the internal representation of a list does indeed include the type as its first element (see the function model, this shouldn't be true when it is translated to Python or JavaScript. There, an empty list should be just [], and a list with a single string "x" should be ["x"]. I wrote a Python and JavaScript implementation for length of list on the Beta, and you can see with the tests that the numbers are as expected: length of list on Beta (note that we shouldn't copy those implementations, because they don't yet implement serialization and deserialization properly).

I hope that helps! Feel free to ask more questions! --DVrandecic (WMF) (talk) 00:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the details, @DVrandecic (WMF). Also, if I understand correctly, there is no sandbox-like available? Tests need to be done on Beta? Lofhi (talk) 04:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
@Lofhi: Yes, that's correct. Tests should go to the Beta. That's our Sandbox for now. --DVrandecic (WMF) (talk) 20:03, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
@DVrandecic (WMF): I still don't understand how to make it works: ["abc", "ab", "a", "abcd", "1", "12"] sorted is [ "a", "1", "ab", "12", "abc", "abcd" ] (Z12675). Lofhi (talk) 15:00, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
@Lofhi: I've made it work. Check out the three recent edits. --99of9 (talk) 02:01, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikifunctions is a deterministic project

... but what about a seeded pseudorandom number generator? We could use a short-cycled value for the seed to hit as often as possible in the cache but still get some randomness. We could use the current weekday (1..7)/hour (0..23)/minute (0..59)? Or bigger cycles for longer caching validity (e.g. week number, month number)? Or the WMF really doesn't like the idea? Lofhi (talk) 12:20, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

I think it would make more sense to have a proper design for how to deal with random outputs. One way could be that the seed is part of the input, and thus it would avoid caching. Having a function that returns the current day would also be problematic with regards to caching: the current day should be an input, then it all works.
In short, it would be good to discuss this in much more detail (does someone want to start a page?). Until then, let's avoid non-deterministic output. --DVrandecic (WMF) (talk) 23:13, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
I've started a page here: WF:Determinism where I suggested some guidelines regarding determinism in Wikifunctions, feel free to comment and/or edit it. Msz2001 (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

How to use a reference to a parameter of a custom function definition ?

I probably missed something, and it’s an experiment and probably not the optimal way of doing something like that, but I tried to write a relatively complex test and got stuck at some time.

The context is the ROT13 function. I wrote a first test that checked that for a particular value the equality "x = rot13(rot13(x))" was fine. No problem with that.

Then I tried to generalize such a test by checking this property on a list of values, and began another test. I tried to use the function "all meet criteria" for this. It tries to check a predicate on a list of values. I tried to write an anonymous lambda function "x -> rot13(rot13(x)=x" for this, but I got stuck because I can’t find how to name the "x" parameter correctly and/or to reference it in the final call "rot13(x)" and in the equality test.

Is it me that missed something or is it not possible yet ? Do I need to create an explicit predicate wikifunction with an id for this to work atm ? TomT0m (talk) 10:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if we support anonymous functions, but regarding the test cases, I believe the more granural tests are the better the outcome is. For example if there was a test whether the function is an involution for 10 words and it fails, we know nothing about where the error stems from. On the other hand, if they were 10 different test cases, it's very easy to find the word that's processed incorrectly and to find out whether one or ten cases fail. Msz2001 (talk) 13:10, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Yes, that’s what I said it was a test and not optimal.
Anyway the user interface proposes to define a function on the fly as you define parameters for "all meet criteria", so I assumed it was kind of possible to define local functions, if not anonymous one. So if it’s unintended it’s quite misleading. TomT0m (talk) 16:36, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
A grouped approach could anyway be taken, while avoiding create a function page for the predicate to avoid code duplication.
Something like using a "filter" function instead of "all meets criteria", you return a list of the failing testcases. The attended results is the empty list, and the UI could show the actual result instead, so you would get a list of the string that do not pass. TomT0m (talk) 16:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Marking functions that reference future types

Every now and then I notice new functions that obviously should take a number as input and/or should return a number, but instead use Strings as workarounds. I am marking them but I am afraid that I might be overlooking some. Any help is appreciated. MilkyDefer 08:00, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

To clarify: this means adding (!) to the beginning of the English function label so it shows up near the top of Special:ListObjectsByType/Z8 when changing interface language to English. /Autom (talk) 11:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Translated name about “Wikifunctions”

Wikifunctions is just a English name ,I think it is necessary to give a Chinese name to it ,"维基方程" ,“维基函数","维基功能" , which is the best one? Hong Kaile (talk) 03:07, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

I perfer “维基函数". 函数 is exactly what Wikifunctions is doing. 方程 is a different concept. 功能 seems a bit far off and needs disambiguation. 94rain (talk) 03:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
In fact a bunch of people prefer Wikifunctions as-is. MilkyDefer 04:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Easier language selection / translation adding

The main thing I and many others on Wikifunctions do is the adding of a translation of a certain text in my local language. Things that can use some improvement:

  • Finding where to translate the label/description/alias of the function itself is easy. I click on Icon # languages to see what text has been provided for the languages (as English can be ambiguous). Then I click Add language and the Edit information dialogue appears. Then I have to add my language manually, why? Why is it prefilled if I click on the Pen icon pen icon it is prefilled with my language and a lot less work, but with the Edit information dialogue it creates a lot of work. (And if there is a reason for it, then provide a click selection option, instead of that I type the language code, slow appearing of the language list, select in long list of languages the language the right one.) This sounds maybe a minor thing, but with providing 100(+) translations, this starts to get annoying and because of the amount of times it becomes a major thing.
  • When ready to publish another dialogue appears with the question How did you improve this page? In other projects, like Wikipedia, if I click in this field, I get an overview of earlier used edit summaries which I can choose, but here it doesn't. Or the last used summary is already suggested in the field so I don't have to type over en over the same thing again and again. Again this sounds maybe minor, but when providing 100(+) translations this is tedious.
  • The left box is intended for providing translations, but apparently only some of the translations. If you want to translate the label(s) of certain fields, this is not possible via the left section, but you need to modify the whole page. As many users do not realize there is a translatable label of certain fields, this translation is often forgotten. This works counterproductive. Also the previous two issues above are here a problem too!
  • In multiple functions I have provided the translation for "input" as well as for "number" (etc). Seems to me that this could and should not be provided in each function but be centralised.
  • When multiple translations have been provided, the provided languages are listed in order of creation. If I want to modify it for my language, I have to search to a long list of sections before I can find mine. This is not logic. A more compact overview makes working with it a lot easier, compare for example with Wikidata.

This all creates a lot of extra work and costs extra time. Time that can be spend only once. Romaine (talk) 11:30, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

I think it would be great if it will be easier to translate languages. I have seen many Z-Objects about Languages with only a low number of translations of the language name into other languages. 10 days ago I tried to extract out of Wikidata all Labels for Languages. Maybe it is possible to solve it with a user script what adds the language name in the field after clicking on adding new language until it is implemented in the software itself. Hogü-456 (talk) 21:13, 24 January 2024 (UTC)