I'm newbie to Kotlin, and new to programming also, so pls be gentle :)
Let's say I have a string (it was optimized to NOT have any duplicated character), i want to compare all characters in that string to the alphabet, which declared as a mutable List of character. I want to delete any character from the alphabet which show up in the string. My code is as below
var alphabet=mutableListOf('a','b','c','d','e','f','g','h','i','j','k','l','m',
'n','o','p','q','r','s','t','u','v','w','x','y','z')
var key="keyword"
println(key)
for (i in key.indices)
{for (j in alphabet.indices)
{if (key[i] == alphabet[j])
alphabet.removeAt(j) // 1. this line have error
//print(alphabet[j]) //2. but this line runs fine
}}}
In above code, I have error at the "alphabet.removeAt(j)" command, so I try another command to print out the characters instead of delete them, and it runs fine. I read some articles and I know this error related to the invalid index, but I used the "indices" key and I think it's pretty safe. Pls help
It is safe to iterate using alphabet.indices, but it is not safe to iterate over a collection while modifying it. Note that indices returned indices for a full alphabet, but then you removed some items from it, making it shorter, so indices are no longer valid.
You don't need to iterate over a collection to find an item to remove. You can just do:
alphabet.remove(key[i])
But honestly, you don't need to do anything of this. Your problem is really a subtracting of two sets and you can solve it much easier:
('a'..'z').toSet() - "keyword".toSet()
You could simplify that whole loop to just:
alphabet.retainAll{ it !in key })
or
alphabet.retainAll { !key.contains(it) }
or if you want the filtered list to be a new list rather than doing it in-place:
val filtered = alphabet.filter { it !in key }
but I used the "indices" key and I think it's pretty safe
Well, the indices collection is only evaluated once when a loop is entered, not at the start of each iteration. Even if you change the size of alphabet in the inner loop, the inner loop will still loop the same number of times, because it doesn't evaluate alphabet.indices again. It would only do that again on the next iteration of the outer loop, but your code would throw an exception before that point.
Other than decreasing j whenever you remove an item, you can also solve this by
key.forEach(alphabet::remove)
Related
I have string output:
1 4 2 1 4
I want to get each character in string to compare.
I did it to want to know whether the list is sorted yet.
It's not exactly clear to me what you are trying to achieve. Going by "to know whether the list is sorted", and assuming a list of integers, you can use tcl::mathop::< or tcl::mathop::<=, depending on whether you want to allow duplicate values:
if {[tcl::mathop::<= {*}$list]} {
puts "List is sorted"
} else {
puts "List is mixed up"
}
This will also work for ASCII comparison of strings. For more complex comparisons, like using dictionary rules or case insensitive, it's probably easiest to combine that with lsort along with the -indices option:
tcl::mathop::< {*}[lsort -indices -dictionary $list]
The -indices option returns the original index of each list element in sorted order. By checking if those indices are in incremental order, you know if the original list was already sorted.
Of course, if the point of the exercise was to avoid unnecessary sorting, then this is no use. But then again, bubble sort of an already sorted list is very fast and will basically do exactly the comparisons you described. So just sorting will probably be faster than first checking for a sorted list via a scripted loop.
To get each character in the string, do split $the_string "" (yes, on the empty string). That gives you a list of all the characters in the string; you can use foreach to iterate over them. Remember, you can iterate over two (or more) lists at once:
foreach c1 [split $the_string ""] c2 $target_comparison_list {
if {$c1 ne $c2} {
puts "The first not equal character is “$c1” when “$c2” was expected"
break
}
}
Note that it's rarely useful to continue comparison after a difference is found as the most common differences are (relative to the target string) insertions and deletions; almost everything after either of those will differ.
I'm creating a bunch of mappings that can be indexed into using 3 keys such as below:
mappings["foo"]["bar"]["blah"][1]=0
split( "10,13,19,49", mappings["foo"]["bar"]["blah"] )
I can then index into the nested array using for example
mappings[product][format][version][i]
But this is a bit long-winded when I need to refer to the same nested array several times, so in other languages I'd create a reference to the inner array:
map=mappings[product][format][version]
map[i]
However, I can't seem to get this to work in awk (gawk 4.1.3).
I can only find one link over google, that suggests this is impossible in previous versions of awk, and a loop setting the keys and values one-by-one is the only solution. Is this still the case or does anyone have a suggestions for a better solution?
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/OpenSource/Conceptual/ShellScripting/Howawk-ward/Howawk-ward.html
EDIT
In response to comments a bit more background on what I'm trying to do. If there is a better approach, I'm all for using it!
I have set of CSV files that I'm feeding into AWK. The idea is to calculate a checksum based on specific columns after applying filtering to the rows.
The columns to checksum on, and the filtering to apply, are derivived from runtime parameters sent into the script.
The runtime parameters are a triple of (product,format,version), hence my use of a 3-nested assoicative array.
Another approach would be to use triple as a single key, rather than nesting, but gawk doesn't seem to natively support this, so I'd end-up concatenating the values as string. This felt a bit less structured to me, but if I'm wrong, happy to change my mind on this apporach.
Anyway, it is these parameters that are used to index into the array to structure to retrieve the column numbers, etc.
You can then build-up a tree-like structure, for example, the below shows 2 formats for product foo on version blah, and so on...:
mappings["product-foo"]["format-bar"]["version-blah"][1]=0
split( "10,13,19,49", mappings["product-foo"]["format-bar"]["version-blah"] )
mappings["product-foo"]["format-moo"]["version-blah"][1]=0
split( "55,23,14,6", mappings["product-foo"]["format-moo"]["version-blah"] )
The magic happens like this, you can see how long-winded the mappings indexing becomes without referencing:
(FNR>1 && (format!="some-format" ||
(version=="some-version" && $1=="some-filter") ||
(version=="some-other-version" && $8=="some-other-filter"))) {
# Loop over each supplied field summing an absolute tally for each
for (i=1; i <= length(mappings[product][format][version]); i++) {
sumarr[i] += ( $mappings[product][format][version][i] < 0 ? -$mappings[product][format][version][i]:$mappings[product][format][version][i] )
}
}
The comment from #ed-morton simplifies this as originally requested, but interested if their is a simpler approach.
The right answer is from #ed-morton above (thanks!).
Ed - if you write it out as an answer I'll accept it, otherwise I'll accept this quote in a few days for good housekeeping.
Right, there is no array copy functionality in awk and there are no pointers/references so you can't create a pointer to an array. You can of course create function map(i) { return mappings[product][format][version][i]}
I apologize if this has been asked before (I couldn't find anything).
I'm an extreme noob in Livecode, and I want to know if there is a way of programming a button to create many new, unique variables and assign a value to them. I apologize if this is a dumb question.
Usually you use an array for that. An array is basically a list of things, where each thing is associated with an "index". An index can be any word, so you can use an array like a dictionary, where you'd e.g. have French words as the index, and English words as the value, like:
put "cow" into myDictionary["vache"]
But you can also just use numbers as the keys and make them a numbered list:
put "cow" into allMyAnimals[1]
put "duck" into allMyAnimals[2]
In end effect, you create one variable and put several things in it. For example if you had a loop that calculated something (in this example a number +100) and you wanted to have variables containing all those numbers, but named with 100 less, you'd do something like:
repeat with x = 1 to 250
put x +100 into twoHundredFiftyNumbersFrom101[x]
end repeat
And to read the first one:
answer "the first number is" && twoHundredFiftyNumbersFrom101[1]
Or all of them:
repeat with x = 1 to 250
answer twoHundredFiftyNumbersFrom101[x]
end repeat
Or whatever. You could also use 'do' to build the lines of code as a string, but then you have to make sure your variable names are generated in a fashion that makes them valid identifiers (e.g. have no spaces in them, no special characters). An array key can be any valid string, and the compiler can optimize them, and you can treat them as a whole and pass them between handlers.
Or you can do this "in the clear" with a "do" construction:
on mouseUp
repeat with y = 1 to 10
get random(100)
do "put it into onTheFlyVariable" & y
end repeat
end mouseUp
Step through this handler and watch the variables assemble themselves.
I would like to know what is preferred...
Dim sLines() As String = s.Split(NewLine)
For each:
For Each sLines_item As String In sLines
.GetUpperBound:
For i As Integer = 0 To sLines.GetUpperBound(0)
I have no idea why the "For Each" was introduced for such cases. Until now I have only used .GetUpperBound, and I don't see any PRO for the "For Each".
Thank you
ps: When I use ."GetUpperBound(0)", I do know that I am iterating over the vector.
The "For Each" in contrast sounds like "I don't care in which order the vector is given to me". But that is just personal gusto, I guess.
Short answer: Do not use GetUpperBound(). The only advantage of GetUpperBound() is that it works for multi-dimensional arrays, where Length doesn't work. However, even that usage is outdated since there is Array.GetLength() available that takes the dimension parameter. For all other uses, For i = 0 to Array.Length - 1 is better and probably the fastest option.
It's largely a personal preference.
If you need to alter the elements of the array, you should use For i ... because changing sLines_item will not affect the corresponding array element.
If you need to delete elements of the array, you can iterate For i = ubound(sLines) to 0 step -1 (or the equivalent).
Short answer
You should always use For Each on IEnumerable types unless you have no other choice.
Long answer
Contrary to the popular understanding, For Each is not a syntactic sugar on top of For Next. It will not necessarily iterate over every element of its source. It is a syntactic sugar on top of IEnumerable.GetEnumerator(). For Each will first get an enumerator to its source then loop until it cannot enumerate further. Basically, it will be replaced by the following code. Keep in mind that this is an oversimplification.
' Ask the source for a way to enumerate its content in a forward only manner.
Dim enumerator As IEnumerator = sLines.GetEnumerator()
' Loop until there is no more element in front of us.
While enumerator.Next() Then
' Invoke back the content of the for each block by passing
' the currently enumerated element.
forEachContent.Invoke(enumerator.Current)
End While
The major difference between this and a classical For Next loop is that it does not depend on any length. This fixes two limitations in modern .NET languages. The first one has to do with the Count method. IEnumerable provides a Count method, but the implementation might not be able to keep track of the actual amount of elements it stores. Because of this, calling IEnumerable.Count might cause the source to be iterated over to actually count the amount of element it contains. Moreover, doing this as the end value for traditional For Next loop will cause this process to be done for every element in the loop. This is very slow. Here is an illustration of this process:
For i As Integer = 0 To source.Count() ' This here will cause Count to be
' evaluated for every element in source.
DoSomething(source(i))
Next
The use of For Each fixes this by never requesting the length of the source.
The second limitation it fixes is the lack of a concept for arrays with infinite amount of elements. An example of such cases would be an array containing every digit of PI where each digit is only calculated when you request them. This is where LINQ makes its entrance and really shines because it enables you to write the following code:
Dim piWith10DigitPrecision = From d In InfinitePiSource
Take 10
Dim piWith250DigitPrecision = From d In InfinitePiSource
Take 250
Dim infite2PiSource = From d In InfinitePiSource
Select d * 2
Now, in an infinite source, you cannot depend on a length to iterate over all of its elements. It has an infinite length thus making a traditional For Next loop an infinite loop. This does not change anything for the first two examples I have given with pi because we explicitly provides the amount of elements we want, but it does for the third one. When would you stop iterating? For Each, when combined with Yield (used by the Take operator), makes sure that you never iterate until you actually requests a specific value.
You might have already figured it out by now but these two things means that For Each effectively have no concept of bounds because it simply does not require them. The only use for GetLowerBound and GetUpperBound are for non-zero-indexed arrays. For instance, you might have an array that indexes values from 1 instead of zero. Even then, you only need GetLowerBound and Length. Obviously, this is only if the position of the element in the source actually matters. If it does not, you can still use For Each to iterate over all elements as it is bound agnostic.
Also, as already mentioned, GetLength should be used for zero-indexed multi-dimensional arrays, again, only if the position of the element matters and not just the element itself.
the idea is to take a word and sub out all specified letters for another letter.
Any help on how to make this kind of function work?
The last array_push is not being called because you're returning before. Change it to:
array_push($stepsinchain, $subed);
return $subed;
Since $subed is never stored in the $stepsinchain array, due to the return being before, you're not able to access previous alternations.
array_push is also slower and not recommended when entering one element in an array. Instead, use
$stepsinchain[] = $subed;
It is also much faster as documented at http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.array-push.php#Hcom83388