I'm trying to sort some strings with hexa numbers, my problem is that they are to irregular and hard for my knowledge in Access so I could really use some help!
From every file "Files" are one REQUEST string with a corresponding RESPONSE string they are similar at the first 4 characters "16xx" and always at the 8-9 character "xx" sometimes in more places and at character 5-6 are +40 added to the RESPONSE ex 19 -> 59. I took some examples from my table (the real table is 600 rows with different string from 24 different files)
ID = pimekey, Files = file where string came form, Nr = what nr the string had in file, String = the string I would like to sort, TYPE = if it was a REQUEST or RESPONSE
I would like to make pairs of them in a new query like this...
...so that they are aliened in Files order with the REQUEST before the RESPONSE.
I have tried making different queries all day to sort this out but can´t get the syntax right. Tried sorting through using SQL left, iif , mid,len function with Update queries, but I either get syntax error, nothing or the wrong values... Is there a way of doing this or are they to irregular to even sort?
Thanks
EDIT
from one file how it look now:
ID Files Nr String Type
1 1 1 1636 19 02 2F REQUEST
2 2 2 1637 19 02 2F REQUEST
3 2 3 1631 19 02 2F REQUEST
4 3 4 1637 19 04 0A 1B 47 FF REQUEST
28 1 10 1636 59 02 FF RESPONSE
29 2 11 1637 59 02 FF RESPONSE
30 2 12 1631 59 02 7F C1 00 00 28 C2 A4 RESPONSE
31 3 13 1637 59 04 0A 1B 47 00 RESPONSE
how I would want it:
ID Files Nr String Type
1 1 1 1636 19 02 2F REQUEST
28 1 10 1636 59 02 FF RESPONSE
2 2 2 1637 19 02 2F REQUEST
29 2 11 1637 59 02 FF RESPONSE
3 2 3 1631 19 02 2F REQUEST
30 2 12 1631 59 02 7F C1 00 00 28 C2 A4 RESPONSE
4 3 4 1637 19 04 0A 1B 47 FF REQUEST
31 3 13 1637 59 04 0A 1B 47 00 RESPONSE
You can try something like this (MYSQL). It use user defined variable to "generate" field for ordering. I suppose FIL is the name of the table:
SELECT ID, FILES, NR, STRING, TYPE
FROM (
SELECT *
, #o:= CASE WHEN TYPE='REQUEST' THEN #o+2 ELSE 0 END ord
, #p:= CASE WHEN TYPE= 'RESPONSE' THEN #p+2 ELSE 0 END ord2
, #o+#p AS ord_tot
FROM FIL A
CROSS JOIN (SELECT #o:=-1,#p:=2 ) T1
ORDER BY TYPE, FILES, NR
) B
ORDER BY ord_tot;
Output:
ID FILES NR STRING TYPE
1 1 1 1636 19 02 2F REQUEST
28 1 10 1636 59 02 FF RESPONSE
2 2 2 1637 19 02 2F REQUEST
29 2 11 1637 59 02 FF RESPONSE
3 2 3 1631 19 02 2F REQUEST
30 2 12 1631 59 02 7F C1 00 00 28 C2 A4 RESPONSE
4 3 4 1637 19 04 0A 1B 47 FF REQUEST
31 3 13 1637 59 04 0A 1B 47 00 RESPONSE
The simplest way to accomplish this would be to use MySQL's built hexadecimal format and then just use ORDER BY on the correct fields. This is of course assuming you can modify how your data is stored to conform to the hexadecimal format described.
We are using a fulltext search to search for the name of a company and all is going well until we have a company with an ampersand in its name, e.g. 'M&S'.
SELECT name FROM company WHERE MATCH (name) against ('M&S' IN BOOLEAN MODE);
This fails to return any results as MySQL is treating the ampersand as a boolean operator. The boolean mode is desired so it can't simply be turned off.
What I'm looking for is a way to escape the ampersand so that MySQL treats it correctly and finds the record.
Ditching fulltext search in favour of LIKEs isn't exactly an option either
Thanks for your help
Seems like & isn't considered a word character in the collation you use for your fulltext search.
so you have to create your own collation (or recompile your MySQL server) where you add & to the list of word characters like i found out in the MySQL docs (
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/fulltext-fine-tuning.html) :
If you want to change the set of characters that are considered word
characters, you can do so in several ways, as described in the
following list. After making the modification, you must rebuild the
indexes for each table that contains any FULLTEXT indexes. Suppose
that you want to treat the hyphen character ('-') as a word character.
Use one of these methods:
Modify the MySQL source: In myisam/ftdefs.h, see the true_word_char()
and misc_word_char() macros. Add '-' to one of those macros and
recompile MySQL.
Modify a character set file: This requires no recompilation. The
true_word_char() macro uses a “character type” table to distinguish
letters and numbers from other characters. . You can edit the contents
of the array in one of the character set XML files to
specify that '-' is a “letter.” Then use the given character set for
your FULLTEXT indexes. For information about the array
format, see Section 10.3.1, “Character Definition Arrays”.
Add a new collation for the character set used by the indexed columns,
and alter the columns to use that collation. For general information
about adding collations, see Section 10.4, “Adding a Collation to a
Character Set”. For an example specific to full-text indexing, see
Section 12.9.7, “Adding a Collation for Full-Text Indexing”.
UPDATE: in case you are using latin1 collation, open your XML file which is at mysql/share/charsets/latin1.xml. and find the corresponding character code in a map - in this case you can take the map for lower case or upper case because this doesn't matter for the ampersand symbol:
<lower>
<map>
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0A 0B 0C 0D 0E 0F
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1A 1B 1C 1D 1E 1F
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F
40 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 6A 6B 6C 6D 6E 6F
70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 7A 5B 5C 5D 5E 5F
60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 6A 6B 6C 6D 6E 6F
70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 7A 7B 7C 7D 7E 7F
80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 8A 8B 8C 8D 8E 8F
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 9A 9B 9C 9D 9E 9F
A0 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 AA AB AC AD AE AF
B0 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 BA BB BC BD BE BF
E0 E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 EA EB EC ED EE EF
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 D7 F8 F9 FA FB FC FD FE DF
E0 E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 EA EB EC ED EE EF
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 FA FB FC FD FE FF
</map>
</lower>
the ampersand's unicode is U+0026 and in utf-8 encoding it's 0x26, so search for 26 in the map - which is in the 3rd row, 7th column.
then in the ctype-map change the type of the character from 10 which means punctuation to 01 which means small letter:
<ctype>
<map>
00
20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 28 28 28 28 28 20 20
20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
48 10 10 10 10 10 01 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 10 10 10 10 10 10
10 81 81 81 81 81 81 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01
01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 10 10 10 10 10
10 82 82 82 82 82 82 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02
02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 10 10 10 10 20
10 00 10 02 10 10 10 10 10 10 01 10 01 00 01 00
00 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 02 10 02 00 02 01
48 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01
01 01 01 01 01 01 01 10 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 02
02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02
02 02 02 02 02 02 02 10 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02
</map>
</ctype>
restart your MySQL server and the corresponding collation is handling & like it was a small letter.
of course it's better to first copy and rename your new collation XML-file and to also copy and paste the corresponding lines in the Index.xml (don't forget to use a new unused id in the XML tags there) and link them to your new collation XML-file so you don't lose your original collation.
you can find the full documentation where i got most of the information from here:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/full-text-adding-collation.html
Note - For all those working with Mysql 5.7 version use an unused collation id. The mysql article http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/fulltext-fine-tuning.html is for Mysql 5.5 version. To get maximum collation Id use following Query -
SELECT MAX(ID) FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.COLLATIONS;
EDIT: so the & is splitting it into two separate words... since they are 1 letter it is not returning anything. I tested with "Ma&Sa".. my ft_min_word_len = 4... and it didn't return anything so since the length of that string > 4 but its not returning it has to be splitting it into two words... it looks like the suggestion northkildonan made is what you have to do.
So this may or may not be an answer.. but I hope it is helpful for figuring this out.. try this.
first: run this statement -- SHOW VARIABLES LIKE 'ft_min_word_len'; and affirm that the length is actually = 2
if it is i'm not sure how it is any different than a word that is longer than a length of 4
Second: I did this and got results.
SET UP:
I set up a sample table on my localhost database...
create table company(
`id` int,
`name` varchar(55)
);
insert into company
(`id`, `name`)
values
(1, 'oracle'),
(2, 'microsoft'),
(3, 'M&S'),
(4, 'dell');
TESTS:
tested when ft_min_word_len = 4 and obviously it didn't return anything.
SELECT `name` FROM company WHERE MATCH (`name`) against ("M&S" IN BOOLEAN MODE);
I didn't want to try restarting my localhost database to reset the length to 2 (incase I accidentally mess something up because I use it a lot)..
but I got the idea of trying to look for the name of a company that was longer than a length of 4 with the & in it.
MORE SETUP:
insert into company
(`id`, `name`)
values
(5, 'Mary&Sasha');
ANOTHER TEST:
SELECT `name` FROM company WHERE MATCH (`name`) against ("Mary&Sasha" IN BOOLEAN MODE);
this returned http://screencast.com/t/Rx8mh98OUp
I also did this just incase the collation was messing it up but I doubt that was the problem..
COLLATION STUFF:
ALTER TABLE company MODIFY
`name` VARCHAR(55)
CHARACTER SET latin1
COLLATE latin1_german2_ci;
you can also check your tables collation with:
SHOW TABLE STATUS;
hope this is at least some help :)
& is not a special character in mysql therefore you are able to store and search for the expression &
you can test that as followed
SELECT name FROM `testing` WHERE name LIKE '%&%'
also please try somthing like the following to replace the &.
SET #searchstring = 'M&S';
SET #searchstring = REPLACE(#searchstring,'&','&');
SELECT name FROM company WHERE MATCH (name) against (#searchstring IN BOOLEAN MODE);
You may also take a look at regexp.
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/regexp.html
Here the & is used as followed.
mysql> SELECT '&' REGEXP '[[.ampersand.]]';
The following query is also getting you the result
SELECT *
FROM `testing`
WHERE `name` REGEXP CONVERT( _utf8 'M&S'
USING latin1 ) COLLATE latin1_german2_ci
LIMIT 0 , 30
please also read this thread, maybe you can understand it better then me. This is SQL but they seem to have solved the problem
http://forums.asp.net/t/1073707.aspx?Full+text+search+and+sepcial+characters+like+ampersand+
sorry I couldn´t help more
Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
I recently pointed a student doing work experience to an article about dumping a multiplication table to the console. It used a nested for loop and multiplied the step value of each.
This looked like a .NET 2.0 approach. I was wondering, with the use of Linq and extension methods,for example, how many lines of code it would take to achieve the same result.
Is the stackoverflow community up to the challenge?
The challenge:
In a console application, write code to generate a table like this example:
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09
02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24 27
04 08 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
06 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
08 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
09 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
As this turned into a language-agnostic code-golf battle, I'll go with the communities decision about which is the best solution for the accepted answer.
There's been alot of talk about the spec and the format that the table should be in, I purposefully added the 00 format but the double new-line was originally only there because I didn't know how to format the text when creating the post!
J - 8 chars - 24 chars for proper format
*/~1+i.9
Gives:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
This solution found by #earl:
'r(0)q( )3.'8!:2*/~1+i.9
Gives:
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09
02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24 27
04 08 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
06 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
08 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
09 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
MATLAB - 10 characters
a=1:9;a'*a
... or 33 characters for stricter output format
a=1:9;disp(num2str(a'*a,'%.2d '))
Brainf**k - 185 chars
>---------[++++++++++>---------[+<[-<+>>+++++++++[->+>>---------[>-<++++++++++<]<[>]>>+<<<<]>[-<+>]<---------<]<[->+<]>>>>++++[-<++++>]<[->++>+++>+++<<<]>>>[.[-]<]<]++++++++++.[-<->]<+]
cat - 252 characters
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09
02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24 27
04 08 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
06 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
08 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
09 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
Assuming that a trailing newline is wanted; otherwise, 251 chars.
* runs *
Python - 61 chars
r=range(1,10)
for y in r:print"%02d "*9%tuple(y*x for x in r)
C#
This is only 2 lines. It uses lambdas not extension methods
var nums = new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 };
nums.ForEach(n => { nums.ForEach(n2 => Console.Write((n * n2).ToString("00 "))); Console.WriteLine(); });
and of course it could be done in one long unreadable line
new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 }.ForEach(n => { new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 }.ForEach(n2 => Console.Write((n * n2).ToString("00 "))); Console.WriteLine(); });
all of this is assuming you consider a labmda one line?
K - 12 characters
Let's take the rosetta-stoning seriously, and compare Kdb+'s K4 with the canonical J solution (*/~1+i.9):
a*/:\:a:1+!9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
J's "table" operator (/) equals the K "each-left each-right" (/:\:) idiom. We don't have J's extremely handy "reflexive" operator (~) in K, so we have to pass a as both left and right argument.
Fortran95 - 40 chars (beating perl by 4 chars!)
This solution does print the leading zeros as per the spec.
print"(9(i3.2))",((i*j,i=1,9),j=1,9);end
Oracle SQL, 103 characters:
select n, n*2, n*3, n*4, n*5, n*6, n*7, n*8, n*9 from (select rownum n from dual CONNECT BY LEVEL < 10)
C# - 117, 113, 99, 96, 95 89 characters
updated based on NickLarsen's idea
for(int x=0,y;++x<10;)
for(y=x;y<x*10;y+=x)
Console.Write(y.ToString(y<x*9?"00 ":"00 \n"));
99, 85, 82 81 characters
... If you don't care about the leading zeros and would allow tabs for alignment.
for(int x=0,y;++x<10;)
{
var w="";
for(y=1;++y<10;)
w+=x*y+" ";
Console.WriteLine(w);
}
COBOL - 218 chars -> 216 chars
PROGRAM-ID.P.DATA DIVISION.WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
1 I PIC 9.
1 N PIC 99.
PROCEDURE DIVISION.PERFORM 9 TIMES
ADD 1 TO I
SET N TO I
PERFORM 9 TIMES
DISPLAY N' 'NO ADVANCING
ADD I TO N
END-PERFORM
DISPLAY''
END-PERFORM.
Edit
216 chars (probably a different compiler)
PROGRAM-ID.P.DATA DIVISION.WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
1 I PIC 9.
1 N PIC 99.
PROCEDURE DIVISION.
PERFORM B 9 TIMES
STOP RUN.
B.
ADD 1 TO I
set N to I
PERFORM C 9 TIMES
DISPLAY''.
C.
DISPLAY N" "NO ADVANCING
Add I TO N.
Not really a one-liner, but the shortest linq i can think of:
var r = Enumerable.Range(1, 9);
foreach (var z in r.Select(n => r.Select(m => n * m)).Select(a => a.Select(b => b.ToString("00 "))))
{
foreach (var q in z)
Console.Write(q);
Console.WriteLine();
}
In response to combining this and SRuly's answer
Enumberable.Range(1,9).ToList.ForEach(n => Enumberable.Range(1,9).ToList.ForEach(n2 => Console.Write((n * n2).ToString("00 "))); Console.WriteLine(); });
Ruby - 42 Chars (including one linebreak, interactive command line only)
This method is two lines of input and only works in irb (because irb gives us _), but shortens the previous method by a scant 2 charcters.
1..9
_.map{|y|puts"%02d "*9%_.map{|x|x*y}}
Ruby - 44 Chars (tied with perl)
(a=1..9).map{|y|puts"%02d "*9%a.map{|x|x*y}}
Ruby - 46 Chars
9.times{|y|puts"%02d "*9%(1..9).map{|x|x*y+x}}
Ruby - 47 Chars
And back to a double loop
(1..9).map{|y|puts"%02d "*9%(1..9).map{|x|x*y}}
Ruby - 54 chars!
Using a single loop saves a couple of chars!
(9..89).map{|n|print"%02d "%(n/9*(x=n%9+1))+"\n"*(x/9)}
Ruby - 56 chars
9.times{|x|puts (1..9).map{|y|"%.2d"%(y+x*y)}.join(" ")}
Haskell — 85 84 79 chars
r=[1..9]
s x=['0'|x<=9]++show x
main=mapM putStrLn[unwords[s$x*y|x<-r]|y<-r]
If double spacing is required (89 81 chars),
r=[1..9]
s x=['0'|x<=9]++show x
main=mapM putStrLn['\n':unwords[s$x*y|x<-r]|y<-r]
F# - 61 chars:
for y=1 to 9 do(for x=1 to 9 do printf"%02d "(x*y));printfn""
If you prefer a more applicative/LINQ-y solution, then in 72 chars:
[1..9]|>Seq.iter(fun y->[1..9]|>Seq.iter((*)y>>printf"%02d ");printfn"")
c# - 125, 123 chars (2 lines):
var r=Enumerable.Range(1,9).ToList();
r.ForEach(n=>{var s="";r.ForEach(m=>s+=(n*m).ToString("00 "));Console.WriteLine(s);});
C - 97 79 characters
#define f(i){int i=0;while(i++<9)
main()f(x)f(y)printf("%.2d ",x*y);puts("");}}
Perl, 44 chars
(No hope of coming anywhere near J, but languages with matrix ops are in a class of their own here...)
for$n(1..9){printf"%3d"x9 .$/,map$n*$_,1..9}
R (very similar to Matlab on this level): 12 characters.
> 1:9%*%t(1:9)
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6] [,7] [,8] [,9]
[1,] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
[2,] 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
[3,] 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27
[4,] 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
[5,] 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
[6,] 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
[7,] 7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
[8,] 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
[9,] 9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
PHP, 71 chars
for($x=0;++$x<10;print"\n"){for($y=0;++$y<10;){printf("%02d ",$x*$y);}}
Output:
$ php -r 'for($x=0;++$x<10;print"\n"){for($y=0;++$y<10;){printf("%02d ",$x*$y);}}'
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09
02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24 27
04 08 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
06 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
08 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
09 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
C#, 135 chars, nice and clean:
var rg = Enumerable.Range(1, 9);
foreach (var rc in from r in rg
from c in rg
select (r * c).ToString("D2") + (c == 9 ? "\n\n" : " "))
Console.Write(rc);
PostgreSQL: 81 74 chars
select array(select generate_series(1,9)*x)from generate_series(1,9)as x;
Ruby - 56 chars :D
9.times{|a|9.times{|b|print"%02d "%((a+1)*(b+1))};puts;}
C - 66 Chars
This resolves the complaint about the second parameter of main :)
main(x){for(x=8;x++<89;)printf("%.2d%c",x/9*(x%9+1),x%9<8?32:10);}
C - 77 chars
Based on dreamlax's 97 char answer. His current answer somewhat resembles this one now :)
Compiles ok with gcc, and main(x,y) is fair game for golf i reckon
#define f(i){for(i=0;i++<9;)
main(x,y)f(x)f(y)printf("%.2d ",x*y);puts("");}}
XQuery 1.0 (96 bytes)
string-join(for$x in 1 to 9 return(for$y in 1 to 9 return concat(0[$x*$y<10],$x*$y,' '),'
'),'')
Run (with XQSharp) with:
xquery table.xq !method=text
Scala - 77 59 58 chars
print(1 to 9 map(p=>1 to 9 map(q=>"%02d "format(p*q))mkString)mkString("\n"))
Sorry, I had to do this, the Scala solution by Malax was way too readable...
[Edit] For comprehension seems to be the better choice:
for(p<-1 to 9;q<-{println;1 to 9})print("%02d "format p*q)
[Edit] A much longer solution, but without multiplication, and much more obfuscated:
val s=(1 to 9).toSeq
(s:\s){(p,q)=>println(q.map("%02d "format _)mkString)
q zip(s)map(t=>t._1+t._2)}
PHP, 62 chars
for(;$x++<9;print"\n",$y=0)while($y++<9)printf("%02d ",$x*$y);
Java - 155 137 chars
Update 1: replaced string building by direct printing. Saved 18 chars.
class M{public static void main(String[]a){for(int x,y=0,z=10;++y<z;System.out.println())for(x=0;++x<z;System.out.printf("%02d ",x*y));}}
More readable format:
class M{
public static void main(String[]a){
for(int x,y=0,z=10;++y<z;System.out.println())
for(x=0;++x<z;System.out.printf("%02d ",x*y));
}
}
Another attempt using C#/Linq with GroupJoin:
Console.Write(
String.Join(
Environment.NewLine,
Enumerable.Range(1, 9)
.GroupJoin(Enumerable.Range(1, 9), y => 0, x => 0, (y, xx) => String.Join(" ", xx.Select(x => x * y)))
.ToArray()));
Ruby — 47 chars
puts (a=1..9).map{|i|a.map{|j|"%2d"%(j*i)}*" "}
Output
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
(If we ignore spacing, it becomes 39: puts (a=1..9).map{|i|a.map{|j|j*i}*" "} And anyway, I feel like there's a bit of room for improvement with the wordy map stuff.)