For the following multi sub script:
multi sub Screen_get_valid_string($prompt, $accept_empty_string, $max_length = 999) { return "abc" }
multi sub Screen_get_valid_string($prompt, $max_length = 999) { return "def" }
my $return = Screen_get_valid_string("enter value for string => ", True);
say 'return is ', $return;
I receive the following error:
Ambiguous call to 'Screen_get_valid_string';
these signatures all match:
:($prompt, $accept_empty_string, $max_length = 999)
:($prompt, $max_length = 999)
The only way I found to have the right multi sub called was to use named parameters:
multi sub Screen_get_valid_string(:$prompt, :$accept_empty_string, :$max_length = 999) { return "abc" }
multi sub Screen_get_valid_string(:$prompt, :$max_length = 999) { return "def" }
my $return = Screen_get_valid_string(prompt => "enter value for string => ", accept_empty_string => True);
say 'return is ', $return;
The result is :
return is abc
Thank you
p.s. worked in Perl5; new to Perl6
The error you are getting is because you have the default value set. As such the parser doesn't know if you're asking for
$prompt = "enter value for string => "
$accept_empty_string = True
$max_length = 999
Or
$prompt = "enter value for string => "
$max_length = True
With no type hints there's no was to tell from just the positional which of the two options is correct. Adding types would help (as suggested by JJ Merelo). You can also mix and match positional and named arguments which may help in this situation :
sub Screen_get_valid_string( $prompt,
:$max_length = 999,
:$accept_empty_string = False )
In this situation you don't need a multi. $prompt is always required and the other two are flags with default values.
I gave a talk covering the various options for signatures at LPM recently it might be helpful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obYlOurt-44
Of course you can go the whole hog with :
sub Screen_get_valid_string( Str() $prompt,
Int :$max_length = 999,
Bool :$accept_empty_string = False )
Note the Str() accepts anything that will coerce to a Str.
The main problem is that in Perl 6 a Bool like True is actually a type of Int like 999 so even if you declare their type (Bool $accept_empty_string, Int $max_length) in the signature, it is going to be difficult to make them apart. So in this case, Perl 6 has a hard time making them apart.
But you can still use Positionals if you restrict values
multi sub Screen_get_valid_string($prompt,
$accept_empty_string where True|False,
$max_length = 999) {
return "abc"
}
multi sub Screen_get_valid_string($prompt, $max_length = 999) {
return "def"
}
my $return = Screen_get_valid_string("enter value for string => ", True);
say 'return is ', $return; # writes "return is abc"
where helps constrain the possible values the variable might take, which helps disambiguate the choice of multi.
Related
So I have a question where I am checking if a string has every letter of the alphabet in it. I was able to check if there is alphabet in the string, but I'm not sure how to check if there is EVERY alphabet in said string. Here's the code
fun isPangram (pangram: Array<String>) : String {
var panString : String
var outcome = ""
for (i in pangram.indices){
panString = pangram[i]
if (panString.matches(".^*[a-z].*".toRegex())){
outcome = outcome.plus('1')
}
else {outcome = outcome.plus('0')}
}
return outcome
}
Any ideas are welcomed Thanks.
I think it would be easier to check if all members of the alphabet range are in each string than to use Regex:
fun isPangram(pangram: Array<String>): String =
pangram.joinToString("") { inputString ->
when {
('a'..'z').all { it in inputString.lowercase() } -> "1"
else -> "0"
}
}
Hi this is how you can make with regular expression
Kotlin Syntax
fun isStrinfContainsAllAlphabeta( input: String) {
return input.lowercase()
.replace("[^a-z]".toRegex(), "")
.replace("(.)(?=.*\\1)".toRegex(), "")
.length == 26;
}
In java:
public static boolean isStrinfContainsAllAlphabeta(String input) {
return input.toLowerCase()
.replace("[^a-z]", "")
.replace("(.)(?=.*\\1)", "")
.length() == 26;
}
the function takes only one string. The first "replaceAll" removes all the non-alphabet characters, The second one removes the duplicated character, then you check how many characters remained.
Just to bounce off Tenfour04's solution, if you write two functions (one for the pangram check, one for processing the array) I feel like you can make it a little more readable, since they're really two separate tasks. (This is partly an excuse to show you some Kotlin tricks!)
val String.isPangram get() = ('a'..'z').all { this.contains(it, ignoreCase = true) }
fun checkPangrams(strings: Array<String>) =
strings.joinToString("") { if (it.isPangram) "1" else "0" }
You could use an extension function instead of an extension property (so it.isPangram()), or just a plain function with a parameter (isPangram(it)), but you can write stuff that almost reads like English, if you want!
I want to make a function which compares strings.
I don't want to use equal operators (==), I want it worked only with Swift language.
First I made a function which takes 2 strings, and returns bool type.
then I looped these strings with for in syntax.
And want to compare these characters, if strings have equal value, it should return true, if not, then false. Is there any better way?
func isEqual(str1:String, str2:String) -> Bool {
var result = false
for char in str1 {
}
for char2 in str2 {
}
//Compare characters.
return result
}
== works fine with Strings in Swift. For educational purposes
(as I conclude from your comment "because I'm practicing...")
you can implement it as:
func myStringCompare(str1 : String, str2 : String) -> Bool {
if count(str1) != count(str2) {
return false
}
for (c1, c2) in zip(str1, str2) {
if c1 != c2 {
return false
}
}
return true
}
zip(str1, str2) returns a sequence of pairs from the given
sequences, this is a convenient way to enumerate the strings
"in parallel".
Once you have understood how it works, you can shorten it,
for example to:
func myStringCompare(str1 : String, str2 : String) -> Bool {
return count(str1) == count(str2) && !contains(zip(str1, str2), { $0 != $1 })
}
Comparing the string length is necessary because the zip() sequence
terminates as soon as one of the strings is exhausted. Have a look at
#drewag's answer to In Swift I would like to "join" two sequences in to a sequence of tuples
for an alternative Zip2WithNilPadding sequence.
If you don't want to use the built-in zip() function (again for
educational/self-learning purposes!) then you can use the fact
that Strings are sequences, and enumerate them in parallel using
the sequence generator. This would work not only for strings but
for arbitrary sequences, as long as the underlying elements can
be tested for equality, so let's make it a generic function:
func mySequenceCompare<S : SequenceType where S.Generator.Element : Equatable>(lseq : S, rseq : S) -> Bool {
var lgen = lseq.generate()
var rgen = rseq.generate()
// First elements (or `nil`):
var lnext = lgen.next()
var rnext = rgen.next()
while let lelem = lnext, relem = rnext {
if lelem != relem {
return false
}
// Next elements (or `nil`):
lnext = lgen.next()
rnext = rgen.next()
}
// Are both sequences exhausted?
return lnext == nil && rnext == nil
}
Tests:
mySequenceCompare("xa", "xb") // false
mySequenceCompare("xa", "xa") // true
mySequenceCompare("a", "aa") // false
mySequenceCompare("aa", "a") // false
My solution differ a little as I didn't know about the zip operator, I guess is not as efficient as the one post by Martin great use of tuple.
Great question alphonse
func isEqual(str1:String, str2:String) -> Bool {
if count(str1) != count(str2){
return false
}
for var i = 0; i < count(str1); ++i {
let idx1 = advance(str1.startIndex,i)
let idx2 = advance(str2.startIndex,i)
if str1[idx1] != str2[idx2]{
return false
}
}
return true
}
As pointed by Martin each string needs its own index, as explained by him:
"The "trick" is that "🇩🇪" is an "extended grapheme cluster" and consists of two Unicode code points, but counts as one Swift character."
Link for more details about extended grapheme cluster
The function f in the following code simply attempts to print out it's arguments and how many it receives. However, it expands array parameters (but not arraylists) as illustrated on the line f(x) // 3. Is there anyway to get f not to expand array parameters, or alternatively at the very least detect that it has happened, and perhaps correct for it. The reason for this is because my "real" f function isn't as trivial and instead passes it's parameters to a given function g, which often isn't a variable parameter function which instead expects an array directly as an argument, and the expansion by f mucks that up.
def f = {
Object... args ->
print "There are: ";
print args.size();
println " arguments and they are: ";
args.each { println it };
println "DONE"
}
def x = new int[2];
x[0] = 1;
x[1] = 2;
f(1,2); // 1
f([1,2]); // 2
f(x); // 3
I doubt there is any clean solution to this, as it behaves as Java varargs. You may test the size of the array inside the closure, or, as in Java, use a method overload:
public class Arraying {
public static void main(String[] args) {
// prints "2"
System.out.println( concat( new Object[] { "a", "b" } ) );
// prints "a". Commenting the second concat(), prints "1"
System.out.println( concat( "a" ) );
// prints "3"
System.out.println( concat( "a", "b", "c" ) );
}
static String concat(Object... args) {
return String.valueOf(args.length);
}
static String concat(Object obj) { return obj.toString(); }
}
If you comment the concat(Object obj) method, all three methods will match the concat(Object... args).
You can use a label for the argument as follow:
def f = {
Object... args ->
print "There are: ";
print args.size();
println " arguments and they are: ";
args.each { println it };
println "DONE"
}
def x = new int[2];
x[0] = 1;
x[1] = 2;
f(1,2); // 1
f([1,2]); // 2
f(a:x); // <--- used label 'a', or anything else
then the output is:
There are: 2 arguments and they are:
1
2
DONE
There are: 1 arguments and they are:
[1, 2]
DONE
There are: 1 arguments and they are:
[a:[1, 2]]
DONE
Looking for either a solution, some ideas or being point in the right direction on how to resolve a problem.
Basically, I have to figure out if a string value is in between a Low and High string value. However, the values are in a format which String.Compare will not work. But, a human can easily figure out.
For example, one of my ranges is Low: A7, High A12. A8 fits in between those values but String.Compare says it does not. A13 would not fit between the values.
Other examples of Low and High values are:
Low Value - High Value
1A1 - 1A12
25W00 - 25W050
42W1 - 42W296
W232N0002 - W232N000598
In the above examples 1A2 would fit between the Low High Value of 1A1 and 1A12, but 1A100 would not.
Any ideas on how to resolve this? I know this had to have been encountered before.
This could use some optimization, but it's a proof of concept.
Just convert the letters to numerical values and compare the results:
private bool ValueIsBetween(string value, string lowValue, string highValue)
{
long low = long.Parse(ConvertToNumber(lowValue));
long high = long.Parse(ConvertToNumber(highValue));
long val = long.Parse(ConvertToNumber(value));
return val > low && val < high;
}
private string ConvertToNumber(string value)
{
value = value.ToUpper();
value = value.Replace("A", "0");
value = value.Replace("B", "1");
value = value.Replace("C", "2");
value = value.Replace("D", "3");
value = value.Replace("E", "4");
value = value.Replace("F", "5");
value = value.Replace("G", "6");
value = value.Replace("H", "7");
value = value.Replace("I", "8");
value = value.Replace("J", "9");
value = value.Replace("K", "10");
value = value.Replace("L", "11");
value = value.Replace("M", "12");
value = value.Replace("N", "13");
value = value.Replace("O", "14");
value = value.Replace("P", "15");
value = value.Replace("Q", "16");
value = value.Replace("R", "17");
value = value.Replace("S", "18");
value = value.Replace("T", "19");
value = value.Replace("U", "20");
value = value.Replace("V", "21");
value = value.Replace("W", "22");
value = value.Replace("X", "23");
value = value.Replace("Y", "24");
value = value.Replace("Z", "25");
return value;
}
Results:
ValueIsBetween("1A2", "1A1", "1A12");
true
ValueIsBetween("1A100", "1A1", "1A12");
false
ValueIsBetween("43W4", "42W1", "44W3");
true
Edit:
Try this improved algorithm instead:
private bool ValueIsBetween(string value, string lowValue, string highValue)
{
return !ValueIsLessThan(value, lowValue) && ValueIsLessThan(value, highValue);
}
private bool ValueIsLessThan(string value, string compareTo)
{
var matches = Regex.Matches(value, "[0-9]+|[a-zA-Z]+");
var matchesB = Regex.Matches(compareTo, "[0-9]+|[a-zA-Z]+");
var count = matches.Count < matchesB.Count ? matches.Count : matchesB.Count;
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
long val;
long val2;
if (long.TryParse(matches[i].Value, out val))
{
if (long.TryParse(matchesB[i].Value, out val2))
{
if (val > val2) return false;
if (val < val2) return true;
}
else
{
return false;
}
}
else
{
if (matches[i].Value.CompareTo(matchesB[i].Value) > 0 ) return false;
if (matches[i].Value.CompareTo(matchesB[i].Value) < 0 ) return true;
}
}
return true;
}
Results:
ValueIsBetween("B431Z543", "A0", "Z9");
true
ValueIsBetween("4B31Z543", "A0", "Z9");
false
ValueIsBetween("1A2", "1A1", "1A12");
true
ValueIsBetween("1A100", "1A1", "1A12");
false
ValueIsBetween("43W4", "42W1", "44W3");
true
ValueIsBetween("W5", "CC4", "CC6");
false
ValueIsBetween("W8B4", "W5C3", "W7C3");
false
ValueIsBetween("W5C4", "W5C3", "C7W3");
false
Build a class, probably abstract, with sub classes for each pattern.
The pattern for "25W00" could be ^(?<LEFTTHING>.{2})(?<MIDDLETHING>.{1})(?<RIGHTTHING>.{2})$
In your class, capture each Regex group as a string or numeric as appropriate.
I suppose you could come up with some conventions so you might even be able to have a single Type - and pass in that pattern to the constructor.
You may even have some kind of really smart class where you pass in two strings and a common pattern. This super class builds appropriate "comparable" classes (as per above) and returns a boolean result of the comparison. Your client code would be very clean in this case.
Assuming the non-numeric parts are fixed (i.e. you aren't searching for 1B1 being between 1A1 and 1C1), you could use a regex to expand the numerical values to a certain fixed width, so you could then compare the strings.
For example, using
static Regex digits = new Regex(#"\d+");
static string ExpandDigits(string s)
{
return digits.Replace(s, m => string.Format("{0:D10}", int.Parse(m.ToString())));
}
then calling ExpandDigits("W232N0002") yields W0000000232N0000000002.
You could have a comparison method like this:
static bool IsInRange(string lower, string upper, string test)
{
test = ExpandDigits(test);
lower = ExpandDigits(lower);
if (lower.CompareTo(test) <= 0)
{
upper = ExpandDigits(upper);
if (test.CompareTo(upper) <= 0)
{
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
I'm building a short quiz where the user needs to input the meaning of an acronym.
This means I need to compare a long string (usually a sentence) typed in by the user with an acronym.
I have a feeling I'm not doing it right. For my testing I'm copy-pasting the correct answer to make sure the spelling is correct however I keep getting the feedback that the answer is incorrect.
My question is, am I comparing correctly?
Here's my code:
var arrQuestions:Array = [["LOL","Laughing Out Loud"], ["OMG", "Oh My God"], ["BTW", "By The Way"]];
var i:Number=0;
function setup():void {
quiztext_txt.text = arrQuestions[i][0];
trace(quiztext_txt.text);
trace(arrQuestions[i][1]);
check_btn.addEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, clickHandler);
}//End of Setup()
setup();
function clickHandler(event:MouseEvent):void {
var givenString:String;
var inputString:String;
inputString = userinput_txt.text;
givenString = arrQuestions[i][1];
if (inputString == givenString) {
feedback_txt.text = "Correct!";
} else {
feedback_txt.text = "Wrong!";
}
}
Is there any whitespace before/after the user input? Is the value of i changing in between?
else
{
//what does it trace?
trace("given answer: " + inputString + "\ncorrect answer: " + givenString);
feedback_txt.text = "Wrong!";
}
try clearing the text field in your setup function like so:
function setup():void
{
userinput_txt.text = "";
quiztext_txt.text = arrQuestions[i][0];
trace(quiztext_txt.text);
trace(arrQuestions[i][1]);
check_btn.addEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, clickHandler);
}//End of Setup()
For any kind of string matching I would strongly recommend looking into regular expressions (RegExp). In the regular expression written below I am matching each word, then I say [ ]+ which means "at least one or more spaces", then at the end of the expression I use /gi to say that the expression is case insensitive. In the code above if I type the phrase in lowercase its not going to match, a quick fix for this would be to use this if(inputString.toLowerCase() == givenString.toLowerCase()) which would catch this. Heres the regexp example:
// testString could easily equal myTextField.text
var testString:String = "lauGHing OuT loUD";
// you could store each one in an array, as you were before
var regEx:RegExp = /laughing[ ]+out[ ]+loud/gi
trace( regEx.test( testString ) ); //returns true,test() returns a Boolean
Hope this helps.