I want to create a matrix of size nxn where n is the length of input message:String.
So far this is the only solution that came to my mind and that too has four for loops.
fun main(){
println("Enter the message:")
var message:String = readLine().toString()
var cipher = Array(message.length) { Array<Int>(message.length) {0} }
for(i in 0 .. (message.length - 1)){
for(j in 0 .. (message.length - 1)){
cipher[i][j] = readLine()!!.toInt()
}
}
//print the matrix
for(i in 0..(message.length -1)){
for(j in 0..(message.length -1)){
print(cipher[i][j])
}
println()
}
}
Is there any less complex code for the same? How can I improve this code?
Assuming your input data is row-major, this can be simplified by moving the array filling logic into the array creation itself:
var cipher = Array(message.length) {
IntArray(message.length) { readLine()!!.toInt() }
}
Array's constructor takes an initializer function that is invoked size times to populate the array. By reading user input here, you can populate the array while the matrix is being created and avoid having to write an extra loop.
Miscellaneous notes:
readLine().toString() is redundant and possibly harmful. readLine returns a String?, and you invoke Any?.toString on it, which either returns the result of Any.toString if its receiver is not null, or the literal string "null" (which is probably not desired.)
Consider using the until infix function when looping over arrays (0 until length), rather than 0..(length - 1) (or, even better, the Array.indices extension property.)
Consider using the corresponding primitive array type (i.e. IntArray, FloatArray, etc. rather than Array<*>)
See also:
readLine
Any?.toString
until
indices
IntArray vs Array<Int> in Kotlin
You can also avoid your output loop entirely by simplifying your code:
println(cipher.joinToString("\n") { row -> row.joinToString("") })
Here's a simpler piece of code:
fun main() {
println("Enter the message:")
var message = readLine()!!
var cipher = Array(message.length) {
IntArray(message.length) { readLine()!!.toInt() }
}
println(cipher.joinToString("\n") { it.joinToString("") })
}
Related
I'm wanting to slice a range which I can do in Javascfript but am struggling in kotlin.
my current code is:
internal class blah {
fun longestPalindrome(s: String): String {
var longestP = ""
for (i in 0..s.length) {
for (j in 1..s.length) {
var subS = s.slice(i, j)
if (subS === subS.split("").reversed().joinToString("") && subS.length > longestP.length) {
longestP = subS
}
}
}
return longestP
}
and the error I get is:
Type mismatch.
Required:
IntRange
Found:
Int
Is there a way around this keeping most of the code I have?
As the error message says, slice wants an IntRange, not two Ints. So, pass it a range:
var subS = s.slice(i..j)
By the way, there are some bugs in your code:
You need to iterate up to the length minus 1 since the range starts at 0. But the easier way is to grab the indices range directly: for (i in s.indices)
I assume j should be i or bigger, not 1 or bigger, or you'll be checking some inverted Strings redundantly. It should look like for (j in i until s.length).
You need to use == instead of ===. The second operator is for referential equality, which will always be false for two computed Strings, even if they are identical.
I know this is probably just practice, but even with the above fixes, this code will fail if the String contains any multi-code-unit code points or any grapheme clusters. The proper way to do this would be by turning the String into a list of grapheme clusters and then performing the algorithm, but this is fairly complicated and should probably rely on some String processing code library.
class Solution {
fun longestPalindrome(s: String): String {
var longestPal = ""
for (i in 0 until s.length) {
for (j in i + 1..s.length) {
val substring = s.substring(i, j)
if (substring == substring.reversed() && substring.length > longestPal.length) {
longestPal = substring
}
}
}
return longestPal
}
}
This code is now functioning but unfortunately is not optimized enough to get through all test cases.
I would like to generate random numbers from a union of ranges in Kotlin. I know I can do something like
((1..10) + (50..100)).random()
but unfortunately this creates an intermediate list, which can be rather expensive when the ranges are large.
I know I could write a custom function to randomly select a range with a weight based on its width, followed by randomly choosing an element from that range, but I am wondering if there is a cleaner way to achieve this with Kotlin built-ins.
Suppose your ranges are nonoverlapped and sorted, if not, you could have some preprocessing to merge and sort.
This comes to an algorithm choosing:
O(1) time complexity and O(N) space complexity, where N is the total number, by expanding the range object to a set of numbers, and randomly pick one. To be compact, an array or list could be utilized as the container.
O(M) time complexity and O(1) space complexity, where M is the number of ranges, by calculating the position in a linear reduction.
O(M+log(M)) time complexity and O(M) space complexity, where M is the number of ranges, by calculating the position using a binary search. You could separate the preparation(O(M)) and generation(O(log(M))), if there are multiple generations on the same set of ranges.
For the last algorithm, imaging there's a sorted list of all available numbers, then this list can be partitioned into your ranges. So there's no need to really create this list, you just calculate the positions of your range s relative to this list. When you have a position within this list, and want to know which range it is in, do a binary search.
fun random(ranges: Array<IntRange>): Int {
// preparation
val positions = ranges.map {
it.last - it.first + 1
}.runningFold(0) { sum, item -> sum + item }
// generation
val randomPos = Random.nextInt(positions[ranges.size])
val found = positions.binarySearch(randomPos)
// binarySearch may return an "insertion point" in negative
val range = if (found < 0) -(found + 1) - 1 else found
return ranges[range].first + randomPos - positions[range]
}
Short solution
We can do it like this:
fun main() {
println(random(1..10, 50..100))
}
fun random(vararg ranges: IntRange): Int {
var index = Random.nextInt(ranges.sumOf { it.last - it.first } + ranges.size)
ranges.forEach {
val size = it.last - it.first + 1
if (index < size) {
return it.first + index
}
index -= size
}
throw IllegalStateException()
}
It uses the same approach you described, but it calls for random integer only once, not twice.
Long solution
As I said in the comment, I often miss utils in Java/Kotlin stdlib for creating collection views. If IntRange would have something like asList() and we would have a way to concatenate lists by creating a view, this would be really trivial, utilizing existing logic blocks. Views would do the trick for us, they would automatically calculate the size and translate the random number to the proper value.
I implemented a POC, maybe you will find it useful:
fun main() {
val list = listOf(1..10, 50..100).mergeAsView()
println(list.size) // 61
println(list[20]) // 60
println(list.random())
}
#JvmName("mergeIntRangesAsView")
fun Iterable<IntRange>.mergeAsView(): List<Int> = map { it.asList() }.mergeAsView()
#JvmName("mergeListsAsView")
fun <T> Iterable<List<T>>.mergeAsView(): List<T> = object : AbstractList<T>() {
override val size = this#mergeAsView.sumOf { it.size }
override fun get(index: Int): T {
if (index < 0 || index >= size) {
throw IndexOutOfBoundsException(index)
}
var remaining = index
this#mergeAsView.forEach { curr ->
if (remaining < curr.size) {
return curr[remaining]
}
remaining -= curr.size
}
throw IllegalStateException()
}
}
fun IntRange.asList(): List<Int> = object : AbstractList<Int>() {
override val size = endInclusive - start + 1
override fun get(index: Int): Int {
if (index < 0 || index >= size) {
throw IndexOutOfBoundsException(index)
}
return start + index
}
}
This code does almost exactly the same thing as short solution above. It only does this indirectly.
Once again: this is just a POC. This implementation of asList() and mergeAsView() is not at all production-ready. We should implement more methods, like for example iterator(), contains() and indexOf(), because right now they are much slower than they could be. But it should work efficiently already for your specific case. You should probably test it at least a little. Also, mergeAsView() assumes provided lists are immutable (they have fixed size) which may not be true.
It would be probably good to implement asList() for IntProgression and for other primitive types as well. Also you may prefer varargs version of mergeAsView() than extension function.
As a final note: I guess there are libraries that does this already - probably some related to immutable collections. But if you look for a relatively lightweight solution, it should work for you.
The following code works for reading in a 2d array and printing it back out in Kotlin, however I imagine that with larger datasets swapping from a string to an int list would be rather slow, so is there a quicker way to do it?
fun main() {
var rowAndColumn = readLine()!!.split(" ")
var rows = rowAndColumn[0].toInt()
var columns = rowAndColumn[1].toInt()
val board = Array(rows) { IntArray(columns).toMutableList() }
for (i in 0 until rows) {
var stringColumn = readLine()!!.split("").toMutableList()
stringColumn.removeAll(listOf(""))
var column = stringColumn.map {it.toInt()}.toMutableList()
board[i] = column
}
for(i in 0 until rows) {
println(board[i].toString())
}
}
I measure this to be about 4-5 times faster than your method. It iterates Chars rather than splitting each line into Strings for each character.
var rowAndColumn = readLine()!!.split(" ")
var rows = rowAndColumn[0].toInt()
var columns = rowAndColumn[1].toInt()
val board = arrayOfNulls<IntArray?>(rows)
for (row in 0 until rows) {
board[row] = readLine()!!
.asIterable()
.mapNotNull {
val i = it.toInt() - '0'.toInt()
if (i in 0..1) i else null
}
.toIntArray()
}
board.requireNoNulls()
If you you don't mind ending up with an Array<List<Int>> instead of an Array<IntArray>, you can change that out on line 4 and remove the .toIntArray() call for a slight (~5%) improvement.
Caveat...I was reading from a text file, not the console input, so file access may have affected the comparison. Intuition tells me it's possible this would be even faster in comparison if file reading time were removed.
I am currently learning kotlin and therefore following the kotlin track on exercism. The following exercise required me to calculate the Hamming difference between two Strings (so basically just counting the number of differences).
I got to the solution with the following code:
object Hamming {
fun compute(dnaOne: String, dnaTwo: String): Int {
if (dnaOne.length != dnaTwo.length) throw IllegalArgumentException("left and right strands must be of equal length.")
var counter = 0
for ((index, letter) in dnaOne.toCharArray().withIndex()) {
if (letter != dnaTwo.toCharArray()[index]) {
counter++
}
}
return counter
}
}
however, in the beginning I tried to do dnaOne.split("").withIndex() instead of dnaOne.toCharArray().withIndex() which did not work, it would literally stop after the first iteration and the following example
Hamming.compute("GGACGGATTCTG", "AGGACGGATTCT") would return 1 instead of the correct integer 9 (which only gets returned when using toCharArray)
I would appreciate any explanation
I was able to simplify this by using the built-in CharSequence.zip function because StringimplementsCharSequence` in Kotlin.
According to the documentation for zip:
Returns a list of pairs built from the characters of this and the [other] char sequences with the same index
The returned list has length of the shortest char sequence.
Which means we will get a List<Pair<Char,Char>> back (a list of pairs of letters in the same positions). Now that we have this, we can use Iterable.count to determine how many of them are different.
I implemented this as an extension function on String rather than in an object:
fun String.hamming(other: String): Int =
if(this.length != other.length) {
throw IllegalArgumentException("String lengths must match")
} else {
this.zip(other).count { it.first != it.second }
}
This also becomes a single expression now.
And to call this:
val ham = "GGACGGATTCTG".hamming("AGGACGGATTCT")
println("Hamming distance: $ham")
If I create an array, then fill it, Kotlin believes that there may be nulls in the array, and forces me to account for this
val strings = arrayOfNulls<String>(10000)
strings.fill("hello")
val upper = strings.map { it!!.toUpperCase() } // requires it!!
val lower = upper.map { it.toLowerCase() } // doesn't require !!
Creating a filled array doesn't have this problem
val strings = Array(10000, {"string"})
val upper = strings.map { it.toUpperCase() } // doesn't require !!
How can I tell the compiler that the result of strings.fill("hello") is an array of NonNull?
A rule of thumb: if in doubts, specify the types explicitly (there is a special refactoring for that):
val strings1: Array<String?> = arrayOfNulls<String>(10000)
val strings2: Array<String> = Array(10000, {"string"})
So you see that strings1 contains nullable items, while strings2 does not. That and only that determines how to work with these arrays:
// You can simply use nullability in you code:
strings2[0] = strings1[0]?.toUpperCase ?: "KOTLIN"
//Or you can ALWAYS cast the type, if you are confident:
val casted = strings1 as Array<String>
//But to be sure I'd transform the items of the array:
val asserted = strings1.map{it!!}
val defaults = strings1.map{it ?: "DEFAULT"}
Why the filled array works fine
The filled array infers the type of the array during the call from the lambda used as the second argument:
val strings = Array(10000, {"string"})
produces Array<String>
val strings = Array(10000, { it -> if (it % 2 == 0) "string" else null })
produces Array<String?>
Therefore changing the declaration to the left of the = that doesn't match the lambda does not do anything to help. If there is a conflict, there is an error.
How to make the arrayOfNulls work
For the arrayOfNulls problem, they type you specify to the call arrayOfNulls<String> is used in the function signature as generic type T and the function arrayOfNulls returns Array<T?> which means nullable. Nothing in your code changes that type. The fill method only sets values into the existing array.
To convert this nullable-element array to non-nullable-element list, use:
val nullableStrings = arrayOfNulls<String>(10000).apply { fill("hello") }
val strings = nullableStrings.filterNotNull()
val upper = strings.map { it.toUpperCase() } // no !! needed
Which is fine because your map call converts to a list anyway, so why not convert beforehand. Now depending on the size of the array this could be performant or not, the copy might be fast if in CPU cache. If it is large and no performant, you can make this lazy:
val nullableStrings = arrayOfNulls<String>(10000).apply { fill("hello") }
val strings = nullableStrings.asSequence().filterNotNull()
val upper = strings.map { it.toUpperCase() } // no !! needed
Or you can stay with arrays by doing a copy, but really this makes no sense because you undo it with the map:
val nullableStrings = arrayOfNulls<String>(10000).apply { fill("hello") }
val strings: Array<String> = Array(nullableStrings.size, { idx -> nullableStrings[idx]!! })
Arrays really are not that common in Java or Kotlin code (JetBrains studied the statistics) unless the code is doing really low level optimization. It could be better to use lists.
Given that you might end up with lists anyway, maybe start there too and give up the array.
val nullableStrings = listOf("a","b",null,"c",null,"d")
val strings = nullableStrings.filterNotNull()
But, if you can't stop the quest to use arrays, and really must cast one without a copy...
You can always write a function that does two things: First, check that all values are not null, and if so then return the array that is cast as not null. This is a bit hacky, but is safe only because the difference is nullability.
First, create an extension function on Array<T?>:
fun <T: Any> Array<T?>.asNotNull(): Array<T> {
if (this.any { it == null }) {
throw IllegalStateException("Cannot cast an array that contains null")
}
#Suppress("CAST_NEVER_SUCCEEDS")
return this as Array<T>
}
Then use this function new function to do the conversion (element checked as not null cast):
val nullableStrings = arrayOfNulls<String>(10000).apply { fill("hello") }
val strings = nullableStrings.asNotNull() // magic!
val upperStrings = strings.map { it.toUpperCase() } // no error
But I feel dirty even talking about this last option.
There is no way to tell this to the compiler. The type of the variable is determined when it is declared. In this case, the variable is declared as an array that can contain nulls.
The fill() method does not declare a new variable, it only modifies the contents of an existing one, so it cannot cause the variable type to change.