AllAccepted answers
Joel Solon · Jun 30

One quick answer is a helper ObjectScript class with a wrapper classmethod for each macro. If the helper class can inherit from the class that provides the macros (for example: CustomPackage.TestCase extends %UnitTest.TestCase) then you can replace $$$Macro(args) with self.Macro(args). Otherwise, your helper class must include the INC file that defines the macros, and other classes can call the class methods directly: iris.CustomPackage.HelperClass.Macro(args).

Joel Solon · May 2

Clarification: you can't use * alone as a global mapping. If you want NS1 to get all of its globals from DB1, then the "Default database for globals" field should be DB1. You can then add mappings for certain globals (using * at the end if you want) to additional databases.


(changing your question a little) If you add a mapping B* to DB1, and a mapping of BA* to DB2, BA* mapping takes precedence.

Joel Solon · Feb 10

As @Yaron Munz and @Alexander Koblov correctly pointed out, you can use Embedded SQL or Dynamic SQL. You can also use Class Queries.

Using Embedded SQL, host variables in IRIS (:varname) can be inputs or outputs, just like host variables in SQL Server and Oracle, but without any DECLARE statement. Host variables used as inputs are automatically sanitized. Examples:

WHERE amount > :var1
INSERT INTO ... VALUES (:var1, :var2, :var3)
SELECT ... INTO :var1, :var2 FROM ...

Dynamic SQL allows ? placeholders for inputs only instead of host variables, also automatically sanitized. Examples:

WHERE amount > ?
INSERT INTO ... VALUES (?, ?, ?)

Dynamic SQL returns output values in the result set object it returns, which you can access and copy into variables. Examples:

set resultSet = ##class(%SQL.Statement).%ExecDirect(, sql, values for any placeholders)
while resultSet.%Next() {
    set var1 = resultSet.column1
    set var2= resultSet.column2
}

Class queries use host variables (:varname) for inputs (like Embedded SQL), and return output values in the result set object (like Dynamic SQL).

Joel Solon · Jan 10

I think the other commenters clarified it all, but I thought I'd add a little more.

Try this variant, with the variable x intentionally undefined.

write (1=0) && (x = 0)
0

Since 1=0 is 0, you don't get an <UNDEFINED> for x, since the right-hand (x=0) expression is ignored, and the entire statement is 0. Now try this:

write 1=0 && x=0
1

which, as @Roger Merchberger showed, is really

write (((1=0) && x) = 0)

Since 1=0 is 0, you again don't get an <UNDEFINED> for x, since the x expression (only) is ignored, and the ((1=0) && x) expression is 0. Finally, 0=0 is 1.

Joel Solon · Oct 29, 2024

As others in this thread have said, custom audit events from applications are added to the Audit Log using a call to $system.Security.Audit(). The events must be defined ahead of time in the Portal, using Configure User Events. All events (system and custom) have a 3-part name: Source, Type, and Name. I think of these parts as Main Category, Subcategory, and Name.

The person(s) defining the custom events can choose all 3 parts of the name, in order to categorize all the custom events they're defining. So you could use Source = ABC, Type = DEF, and Name = XYZ. The names are totally up to you. Once defined, the event gets added by some code calling $system.Security.Audit("ABC", "DEF", "XYZ").
 

Joel Solon · Oct 7, 2024

I have a comment on the sentence "I don't want to use Xecute because I am in need of really high performance code."

I have always thought of Xecute and @ (indirection) as similar in performance characteristics. But I don't know what the current reality is. Is it possible that omer was told that Xecute is slow and indirection wasn't mentioned?

Here are some quotes from the docs. I don't see anything here that indicates Xecute is slower or faster than indirection. Maybe someone else on this thread has more detailed knowledge on the difference if any.

  • The execution time for code called within XECUTE can be slower than the execution time for the same code encountered in the body of a routine. This is because InterSystems IRIS compiles source code that is specified with the XECUTE command or that is contained in a referenced global variable each time it processes the XECUTE.
  • You should use indirection only in those cases where it offers a clear advantage. Indirection can have an impact on performance because InterSystems IRIS performs the required evaluation at runtime, rather than during the compile phase.
  • You can always duplicate the effect of indirection by other means, such as by using the XECUTE command.
Joel Solon · Apr 9, 2024

$increment is (or used to be) unique in that it was the only function that changed its argument. It reminded me of learning about "destructive functions" in LISP a long time ago. No matter where/how you use it, it increments. So "set a = $increment(a)" is redundant, but still OK to use. As you saw, developers started to use "if $increment(a)" alone, because that was shorter but also works fine, even thought it looks strange. I wasn't aware of "do $increment(a)" being allowed, which does look nicer, so I also learned something new from this thread, thanks.

And let's not forget to mention the popular and useful "set a($increment(a)) =  something"