September 19th, 2014 at 9:14 am by Dr. Drang
I’ve been reading reviews of the new iPhones in a sort of detached manner. I have a 5S, and although I could upgrade through a intra-family swap, my wife likes the size of her 4S and is skeptical about the advantages of moving up to a 4 inch phone. Also, my 5S is black, and she likes a white phone.
So I figured I’d wait until next year. My thinking was that the A8 processor isn’t that much of an improvement over the A7, and the RAM hasn’t been increased, so it’s not like I’m missing out on a huge leap in power. This is not like the jump from the 5 to the 5S. A lot of this year’s functional improvement is coming from iOS 8, not the internal hardware.1
Last night, as I was making this argument to myself for the tenth time, I remembered that the reason I have a 5S is that I did an intra-family swap with my son last year. The buttons on his iPhone 4 had crapped out; I bought a 5S through his account and gave him my 5. Which means I haven’t bought a phone on my account in two years. And I’ll be able to swap with my son again next year if I want.
Suddenly the differences between the 5S, the 6, and the 6 Plus were no longer theoretical.
In a week or two, when the crowds thin out, I’ll stop in at the local Apple store and see and feel the differences in person. I probably would’ve chosen to do that even if I’d remembered from the start that this was my account’s year to upgrade. It’s fun to have a new phone on the first day, but I don’t think walking around with a paper cutout in your pocket gives you a real sense of a device.
No, I’m not overlooking the elephant in the room. I just don’t think you need to read another exegesis on the advantages and disadvantages of a larger screen. ↩
September 16th, 2014 at 8:34 pm by Dr. Drang
“Image analysis” is a little too hifalutin for what I did today, but it was fun and I solved a real problem.
I had a scanned drawing of the cross section of a hollow extruded aluminum part and needed to calculate the enclosed volume. Because the part’s exterior and interior surfaces were curved—and not arcs of circles or ellipses—straightforward area calculations weren’t possible. But I figured I could make a good estimate by counting pixels and scaling.
The drawing looked sort of like this, only more complicated. There were internal partition walls and more dimension lines.
I opened the scan in Acorn, erased the dimension lines, and filled the solid parts with black and the hollows with 50% gray. Then I cropped it down to the smallest enclosing rectangle, the (physical) dimensions of which were given on the drawing. I ended up with something like this:
The image I had was dirtier than this because there were antialiasing artifacts from the scanning process, but you get the idea.
I had hopes that I could get the count of gray pixels directly from a histogram in Acorn, but I couldn’t find a command that would do that, so I shifted to Python.
misc sublibrary of SciPy has an
imread function that was just what I needed. It reads an image file (PNG, TIFF, JPEG) and turns it into a NumPy array of RGBA or gray values. With that array in hand, I could just scan through it, count the pixels that are at or near 50% gray, and calculate their percentage of the total. Here’s the script:
python: 1: #!/usr/bin/python 2: 3: from scipy import misc 4: import sys 5: 6: img = misc.imread(sys.argv, flatten=True) 7: white = gray = black = 0 8: lower = 255/3 9: upper = 2*lower 10: height, width = img.shape 11: 12: for i in range(height): 13: for j in range(width): 14: if img[i,j] >= lower: 15: if img[i,j] <= upper: 16: gray += 1 17: else: 18: white += 1 19: else: 20: black += 1 21: 22: all = width*height 23: print "Total pixels: %d" % all 24: print "White pixels: %d (%5.2f%%)" % (white, 100.0*white/all) 25: print "Black pixels: %d (%5.2f%%)" % (black, 100.0*black/all) 26: print "Gray pixels: %d (%5.2f%%)" % (gray, 100.0*gray/all)
I did a bit more than was needed, counting the white and black pixels as well as the gray.
Line 6 does the hard work—reading in the file, converting it to grayscale (with
flatten=True), and putting it into an array. The tonal range of 255 was split in thirds in Lines 8 and 9 and every pixel within each third was lumped together. If I’d chosen different values for
upper, I would’ve gotten different results, but not too much different. The great majority of pixels had values of either 0, 128, or 255; only the antialiasing pixels at the edges of the lines were different.
The results looked like this:
Total pixels: 126003 White pixels: 63342 (50.27%) Black pixels: 39870 (31.64%) Gray pixels: 22791 (18.09%)
Multiplying the percentage of grays by the physical height and width of the enclosing rectangle gave me the cross-sectional area of the hollow. Multiplying that by the length of the extrusion gave me the volume. Two significant digits was all I really needed in the result, which is why I didn’t stress over the antialiasing pixels.
There are, I know, commercial programs that can do this and more. But most of them run on Windows (because most engineers use Windows), and the time I would’ve spent finding one and learning how to use it couldn’t have been too much less than the time it took to write 26 lines of code. And I know exactly how this code works.
python: white = np.sum(img > upper)
returns the count of all the white pixels. The expression in the argument,
img > upper compares each item in
upper and returns an array of
Falses. When that’s fed to
sum, it returns the sum of all the
Trues. Very nice.
Treating arrays in chunks like this is how NumPy is supposed to be used. I used loops because that’s what I’ve been doing for 35 years and old habits are hard to break.
September 16th, 2014 at 8:31 am by Dr. Drang
We all gathered around as Chris showed the calculator to Steve and then held his breath, waiting for Steve’s reaction. “Well, it’s a start”, Steve said, “but basically, it stinks. The background color is too dark, some lines are the wrong thickness, and the buttons are too big.” Chris told Steve he’ll keep changing it, until Steve thought he got it right.
So, for a couple of days, Chris would incorporate Steve’s suggestions from the previous day, but Steve would continue to find new faults each time he was shown it. Finally, Chris got a flash of inspiration.
The next afternoon, instead of a new iteration of the calculator, Chris unveiled his new approach, which he called “the Steve Jobs Roll Your Own Calculator Construction Set”. Every decision regarding graphical attributes of the calculator were parameterized by pull-down menus. You could select line thicknesses, button sizes, background patterns, etc.
Steve took a look at the new program, and immediately started fiddling with the parameters. After trying out alternatives for ten minutes or so, he settled on something that he liked.
With version 3.3 of PCalc, James Thomson has gone Espinosa one better: he’s not only built a customizable PCalc, he’s given all of us the power of Steve Jobs.
(Oh, yeah. A lot of the new stuff in PCalc 3.3 has to do with iOS 8. I know nothing about these features because I don’t install beta operating systems on my workaday devices and I don’t have any spare iPhones lying around. It’s the customizable layouts I’ve been lusting after.)
Here’s the Engineering layout I’ve been using for ages, both the normal and 2nd configuration:
It’s perfectly functional, but it isn’t exactly what I want. For example, I almost never need the log2 and 2x functions. With 3.3, I don’t have to see anything I don’t want.
Here’s the new Drang layout:
The first thing you should notice is that all the buttons (apart from the top row) are now the same size, so my fingers have bigger targets to hit. By getting rid of the log2 and 2x keys, the percentage keys, and the hyperbolic trig keys,1 I eliminated a whole row and was able to increase the height of what was left.
You might also notice that I have both the natural log and exponential functions on the normal layout. I use both of these functions a lot, and even though it would have been more consistent to have one as the 2nd key of the other, it was more practical to have them side-by-side.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.
— Ralph Waldo Emerson
To make your own layout, it’s best to start with the built-in layout that most closely resembles what you want to end up with. Go into the Settings, open the list of layouts (vertical in this case), and tap the Edit button. You’ll get a chance to duplicate one of the built-ins and give it its own name.
Then go back to the regular calculator view and start editing the buttons.
To edit a button, press and hold on it until the display shifts and handles appear at the corners of the button. You can use the handles to resize the button, and you can drag it around to any place you like.
To change what the button does, tap the Edit button along the bottom, and a screen will appear that’ll let you change the name and the behavior of the button. You can have it work like any of the regular commands, run a user function, perform a unit conversion, or insert a constant. You can have the button appear in the normal view, the 2nd view, or both.
Because I often do calculations involving the standard normal distribution, I added buttons that calculate its cumulative distribution function (CDF) and inverse CDF. I’ve had these user-defined functions available since PCalc 2.8, but until now I’ve had to dig my way through the f(x) button to get at them.
The Drang layout isn’t particularly imaginative, but with a little thought and a little programming, you could turn PCalc into a whole series of special-purpose calculators. A financial calculator layout like the HP 12C would be a snap. You could also make a cooking layout with buttons for all the conversions between cups, ounces, teaspoons, tablespoons, etc. Metallurgists could create a layout that converts between the many hardness values.
You could, of course, use Numbers or Pythonista to perform these calculations and conversions. But there’s something very efficient about calculator model of tapping in a number and hitting a single button to get your answer. And with the new PCalc Construction Set, you can build a calculator that has buttons for everything you need and nothing you don’t.
I asked James to add the hyperbolic trig keys a few years ago because they are necessary for some engineering and scientific calculations, but I don’t use them enough to have them on my everyday layout. When I need them, I can always switch to the Engineering layout. ↩
September 13th, 2014 at 9:25 pm by Dr. Drang
When I switched to Linux in the late ’90s, I needed a way to write reports and correspondence for work. At the time, there weren’t any open source word processors worth mentioning, and I was done with wordprocessors, anyway. So I set up a report-writing workflow based on SGML, HTML’s big brother, and groff, the GNU version of the ancient Unix text formatter, troff.
I actually enjoyed writing in SGML. Creating a DTD for my reports forced me to think hard about how they ought to be structured. Although my current workflow is different, and I write my reports in Markdown, I still structure them according to the rules I had to formalize back in 1997. And SGML isn’t the straightjacket that XML is; you don’t need closing tags—or even opening tags—if there’s no way to misinterpret an element.
I kind of went SGML-happy in the late ’90s, creating DTDs for every type of structured document I wrote, including my CV. The workflow for generating a PostScript version of my CV was basically the same as the one for reports. Here’s my CV DTD:
xml: 1: <!ELEMENT cv - - (name, pos, intro?, s+)> 2: <!ELEMENT name - O (#PCDATA)> 3: <!ELEMENT pos - O (#PCDATA)> 4: <!ELEMENT intro - O (#PCDATA)> 5: <!ELEMENT s - O (h, (item|ditem)*)> 6: <!ELEMENT h O O (#PCDATA)> 7: <!ELEMENT item - O (#PCDATA | cite | br)*> 8: <!ELEMENT ditem - O (#PCDATA | cite | br)*> 9: <!ATTLIST ditem date CDATA #REQUIRED> 10: <!ELEMENT br - O EMPTY> 11: <!ELEMENT cite - - (#PCDATA)>
The structure isn’t too hard to work out. The CV as a whole consists of my name, my position with the company, an optional introductory paragraph, and then one or more sections. Each section consists of a header followed by some number of items or dated items. Dated items must have a date attribute; otherwise they’re identical to regular items. Items of either sort can contain citations and line breaks.
Here’s an example:
xml: 1: <!DOCTYPE cv SYSTEM "/Users/drang/dtd/cv.dtd"> 2: <cv> 3: <name> 4: Dr. Drang, Ph.D., P.E. 5: <pos> 6: Engineering Mechanics 7: <s> 8: Employment 9: <ditem date="1991-present"> 10: Principal, Drang Engineering, Inc. 11: <ditem date="1985-1990"> 12: Assistant Professor, Small Big Ten University 13: <s> 14: Education 15: <ditem date=1985> 16: Ph.D. in Civil Engineering; University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign<br> 17: Thesis: <cite>An Approach To Structural Analysis That No One Uses</cite> 18: <ditem date=1982> 19: M.S. in Civil Engineering; University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 20: <ditem date=1981> 21: B.S. in Civil Engineering; University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 22: <s> 23: Professional societies 24: <item> 25: American Society of Civil Engineers 26: <item> 27: American Institute of Steel Construction 28: <item> 29: American Concrete Institute 30: <s> 31: Professional licenses and registrations 32: <item> 33: Professional Engineer, State of Illinois 34: <item> 35: Professional Engineer, State of Indiana 36: <item> 37: Professional Engineer, State of Ohio 38: </cv>
Note that the only closing tags are for the
<cite> elements. If you look in the DTD, you’ll see
- 0 in most of the element definitions. That means the opening tag is required but the closing tag is optional. Both the opening and closing tags are optional for the
<h> element; because it’s always the first element within an
<s> and it’s always followed by either an
<item> or a
<ditem>, there’s no need for tags. The SGML processor will know that things like “Employment” and “Education” are
For several years I kept my CV in this form, updating it as necessary. Sometime after switching back to the Mac, I stopped maintaining the SGML version, updating only the troff version. Even though troff isn’t the easiest markup language to write in, adding an item to my CV was pretty simple. I’d just copy a chunk of formatting code from one item, paste it in, and then add the new text.
Yesterday, though, I needed to update a few items in the CV and had the bright idea to return to the SGML form. I still had an old SGML version, so it wasn’t too hard to add the stuff necessary to bring it up to date. But I soon realized I didn’t have an SGML processor—I’d never installed it on my iMac at work.
Back when I was using SGML regularly, the standard processor was
nsgmls, part of James Clark’s SP suite of programs. I couldn’t find a precompiled version for OS X, so I decided to download the source and build it myself. Unfortunately, some of the commands in the makefile threw errors; something in either OS X’s compiler or its libraries wasn’t what the makefile expected. So I started a little yak-shaving adventure.
Installing gcc via Homebrew so I can compile an SGML processor so I can run a Perl program I wrote in 1996.
As you do.
— Dr. Drang (@drdrang) Sep 12 2014 9:47 AM
brew install open-sp
I was in business and was able to stop the installation of gcc and delete the dependencies had already been built. I generated my CV just as I had in the ’90s with only two differences:
- The SGML processor of the OpenSP project is called
- I had to convert the PostScript generated by
groffto PDF. I don’t print my CV very often anymore. I usually email the PDF to prospective clients.
Neither of these was a big deal. The pipeline looked like this:
onsgmls drangCV.sgml | cv2roff | groff | ps2pdf - > drangCV.pdf
cv2roff part is a Perl script that converts the ESIS output of
onsgmls into a troff document. I won’t be showing it here because it’s embarrassing. I had been programming Perl for less than a year when I wrote it, and it’s a mess. Worse, even, than my early Perl is the mixture of tabs and spaces in the source code. I’m sure I was using Emacs at the time and must not have known how to configure it yet. Ick.
Was it worth the trouble? I think so. Because of increased continuing education requirements to maintain my professional engineering licenses, and because I expect to be getting licensed in more states, I’ll be updating my CV more often. Having it in a concise SGML form will make it easier to edit. And even though my old Perl code is ugly, it’s fun to still be able to use a script I wrote over 15 years ago.