Assuming, your input value is an integer, you have , along with the other solutions, one more:

// this works as long as len  < 145
//
set len =  120
set inp = 12345
write $e(1E120_inp,*-len+1,*)

// of course, if the len is shorter than, say 10,
// then you can use smaller constans like
//
set len=10
set inp=9
write $e(1E10_inp,*-len+1,*)

A good (or even a bad) side effect of the above solution is, if you get an input value which is LONGER than the length, it will be truncated to the given length

By the way, if you need again and again a local timestamp with decimals, just create a user defined system variable. Make a one line entry into the %ZLANGV00.mac routine:

%ZLANGV00 ; User defined (system) variables

	// Local timestamp with decimals
ZLTS()	quit $now($ztz-$s($SYSTEM.Util.IsDST():60,1:0))

You can use whatever name you want as long as it starts with Z, contains uppercase chars only and do not conflict with existing names.  Use it as a standard $-variable

write $zlts, $zdt($zlts,3,1,3)
67086,85681.092746
2024-09-03 23:48:01.092

Together with $now() and timezone adjustment you can have the desired result

for time=$h, $now($ztz-$s($SYSTEM.Util.IsDST():60,1:0)) write time,?20,$zdt(time,3,1,3),!
// assuming 60 min summertime offset
//
// you should get an output like thisL
67086,83334         2024-09-03 23:08:54.000
67086,83334.1341026 2024-09-03 23:08:54.134

There is an (old) undocumented function which gives the $h value with several  decimal places, unfortunately the recommended replacement is more or less the above solution instead of a simple $zlts (z-local-timestamp).

We need the source code, so the compiler flag for keeping the source must be on. The 38 char version does the job

ClassMethod ascii() [ ProcedureBlock = 0 ]
{
x	n i f i=32:1:126 w:$t(x)'[$c(i) *i
}

The 34-character version does the job too  has a side effect (leaving the variable i with the last value)

ClassMethod ascii() [ ProcedureBlock = 0 ]
{
y	f i=32:1:126 w:$t(y)'[$c(i) *i
}

It shouldn't be invalid because there are no corresponding constraints.

At the beginning, I thought not to participate, because of the problematic specification and example, but now, as I see, I'm not the only one with questions without answers, hence I offer an 38 char solution too (including the hint to compiler flags) and a shorter version with 34 chars, a correkt result but with "a little bit" of side effect.

The problem is, the specification for this task is simple unprecise, and according to my opinion, gives a faulty example. Your exmple code has just a Set command but the task talks about "print out" - hence, I expected to see either a Write "whatever" or at last a Quit "whatever" comand.
Also, if we talk about a method signature, I take in account the number of arguments (maybe their types) only and the return type but never their method keywords, as in the solution from Eduard, hence his solution is not only creative but valid too.
I think, a fair way to mesure the size of a solution is, if you take the size of the routine which will be executed, and that is the INT routine, which is directly (we neglect the possible compiler optimizations, that's the compilers and not the users credit) compiled into a executable. How I got that code (some generator or via a macro or whatever other method) is actually irrelevant.
A very good example for using or not using a method keyword is the "codemode=expression":

/// you save that "Quit " but have to write "codemode=expression"
/// which is not taken in account by the Implementation.Size
ClassMethod Test() [ codemode = expression]
{
 123
}

/// you have to write "Quit " and save the writing of "codemode..."
/// The Implementation.Size counts that "quit "
ClassMethod Test2()
{
 quit 123
}

Whatever you choose, the corresponding INT code is always "quit ..."

So the bottom line is, either you should define all constraints and conditions or accept each end every clever solution.

First convert the dynamic array to a Cache List and then the Cache List to Python List - voila the job is done

/// Convert a dynamic array to a Cache List
/// 
ClassMethod ArrayToList(arr)
{
	q:'arr.%Size() $lb()
	s list="", it=arr.%GetIterator()
	while it,it.%GetNext(.key,.val) {
		s typ=arr.%GetTypeOf(key)
		s list=list_$case(typ,"object":$lb(val.%ToJSON()),"array":$lb(..ArrayToList(val)),"null":$lb(),:$lb(val))
	}
	q list
}

First, I presume, the Studio lacks such a functionality because usually each nsp contains independent data. As an example, for each of my customers (applications) I have an dedicated namespace  (of course, you may say, one can allways have an exeption),

and second, if there is no readymade functionality, then make your own. Sometimes it takes longer asking questions or searching the internet then writing a quick-and-dirty "one liner", something like this:

// classdefinitions are stored in ^oddDEF, mac-routines in ^rMAC
// as said above, quick-and-dirty:
// if the SEARCHTERM occurs in %-items, then you will get multiple hits
//
// the one-liner version
k n i ##class(%SYS.Namespace).ListAll(.n) s n="" f  s n=$o(n(n)) q:n=""  f s="^|n|rMAC","^|n|oddDEF" f  s s=$q(@s) q:s=""  w:@s_s["SEARCHTERM" s," ",@s,!

// for folks with less experience
//
ClassMethod SearchAllNSP(searchterm)
{
   i ##class(%SYS.Namespace).ListAll(.n) {
      s n=""
      f  {s n=$o(n(n)) q:n=""
          f s="^|n|rMAC","^|n|oddDEF" {
             f  s s=$q(@s) q:s=""  w:@s_s[searchterm s," ",@s,!
          }
      }
   }
}

It's up to you to left out all those multiple %-items and to add some formatting...

So the bottom line of my answer is: yes, there is a way to search (whatever you want) in one go

Class DC.BigJSON Extends %RegisteredObject
{

ClassMethod Test(filename)
{
	if ..SaveToFile(..MakeJSON(), filename) {
		write "Save OK",!
		write "Size ",##class(%File).GetFileSize(filename),!
		
		set input=##class(%File).%New(filename)
		set sts=input.Open("RS")
		if sts {
			set json={}.%FromJSON(input)
			set iter=json.%GetIterator()
			while iter.%GetNext(.key, .val) {
				write "key=",key," size=",$l(val)," data=",$e(val,1,10)_"...",!
			}
		} else  { write $system.Status.GetOneErrorText(sts),! }
	}
}

ClassMethod MakeJSON()
{
	set obj={}
	set obj.text1=$tr($j("",3600000)," ","a")
	set obj.text2=$tr($j("",3600000)," ","b")
	set obj.text3=$tr($j("",3600000)," ","c")
	quit obj
}

ClassMethod SaveToFile(obj, filename)
{
	set file=##class(%File).%New(filename)
	set sts=file.Open("wnu")
	if sts {
		do obj.%ToJSON(file)
		do file.Rewind()
		use file.Name 
		do file.OutputToDevice()
		do file.Close()
		quit 1
	} else { quit sts }
}

}

The size shouldn't be a problem


USER>do ##class(DC.BigJSON).Test("/tmp/test1.txt")
Save OK
Size 10800034
key=text1 size=3600000 data=aaaaaaaaaa...
key=text2 size=3600000 data=bbbbbbbbbb...
key=text3 size=3600000 data=cccccccccc...

The first part (Base 64 encoding is not able to encode ... unicode (2 byte) characters)  is correct. The second part (data-->utf8-->base64 and base64-->utf8-->data) is correct only if there is an agreement beetwen the sender and receiver about the double-encoding (utf8+base64).

If I was told, I get a base64 encoded file then I expect a file which is only base64 encoded and not a mix of several encodings including base64. A simple way to encode your document could be something like this:

ClassMethod Encode(infile, outfile)
{
    // file-binary reads bytes and not characters
    set str = ##class(%Stream.FileBinary).%New()
    set str.Filename = infile
    set len = 24000 // len #3 must be 0 !
    set nonl = 1    // no-newline: do not insert CR+LF
    do str.Rewind()

    open outfile:"nwu":0
    if $test {
        use outfile
        while 'str.AtEnd { write $system.Encryption.Base64Encode(str.Read(len),nonl) }
        close outfile
    }
    quit $test
}

In the past we got challenges with a better definition... ;-((  ☹


In the original post, I'm pretty sure, there were
")s)).:D :~) ;~D :) xD ))" instead of
")s).:D :~) ;~D :) xD"

and
"(smiley) ))" instead of
"(smiley)"

Nevertheless,

"Sadness >:( :[ :{ :("  ---> you say: 0
         >                     I say: 1 (0 Eyses, 0 noses 1 mouth)
and there is no rule about interspace requirements

My quick solution:

ClassMethod Count(s)
{
	while $locate(s,"[:;8B=]?[co\^~-]?[\)\]\}D>]",$g(i),i),$i(n){} q +$g(n)
}

/// If one accepts "" as 0 then change +$g(n) to $g(n)

/// I would like a solution as (see the + char in regex)
/// but then the rules should be changed
///
ClassMethod Count(s)
{
	while $locate(s,"[:;8B=]?[co\^~-]?[\)\]\}D>]+",$g(i),i),$i(n){} q +$g(n)
}

According to your definition, "A number is Esthetic if ... between every pair of its adjacent digits ...", the test example

test.assert_equals(esthetic(1), [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10])

is wrong, because the number one (1) converted in whatever number base is always 1. Looking on that 1 I do NOT see any ADJACENT digit(s), except you define that a single digit is always an esthetic number (but I do not see such a definition).

justmy2cents

If your system does not support JSON (i.e. pre 2016.2?) then give this "dirty trick" a try:

- add a zero-width-space character to your numbers
- create the output stream
- remove the zero-width-space characters

Instead of the zero-width-space you can use any other character too, which does not appear in your data (binary data should be base64 encoded).

ClassMethod WithQuotes()
{
	set zwsp = $c(8203) // zero-width-space
	set obj = ##class(%ZEN.proxyObject).%New()
	
	set obj.ID = 1234_zwsp
	set obj.Number=123.45_zwsp
	
	if ##class(%ZEN.Auxiliary.jsonArrayProvider).%WriteJSONStreamFromObject(.tmp,obj) {
  		set json=##class(%Stream.TmpBinary).%New()
		do tmp.Rewind()
		while 'tmp.AtEnd { do json.Write($tr(tmp.Read(32000),zwsp)) }
	}
	
	do json.Rewind()
	write json.Read(json.Size)
}