I have a string.
string str = "TTFTTFFTTTTF";
How can I break this string and add character ","?
result should be- TTF,TTF,FTT,TTF
You could use String.Join after you've grouped by 3-chars:
var groups = str.Select((c, ix) => new { Char = c, Index = ix })
.GroupBy(x => x.Index / 3)
.Select(g => String.Concat(g.Select(x => x.Char)));
string result = string.Join(",", groups);
Since you're new to programming. That's a LINQ query so you need to add using System.Linq to the top of your code file.
The Select extension method creates an anonymous type containing the char and the index of each char.
GroupBy groups them by the result of index / 3 which is an integer division that truncates decimal places. That's why you create groups of three.
String.Concat creates a string from the 3 characters.
String.Join concatenates them and inserts a comma delimiter between each.
Here is a really simple solution using StringBuilder
var stringBuilder = new StringBuilder();
for (int i = 0; i < str.Length; i += 3)
{
stringBuilder.AppendFormat("{0},", str.Substring(i, 3));
}
stringBuilder.Length -= 1;
str = stringBuilder.ToString();
I'm not sure if the following is better.
stringBuilder.Append(str.Substring(i, 3)).Append(',');
I would suggest to avoid LINQ in this case as it will perform a lot more operations and this is a fairly simple task.
You can use insert
Insert places one string into another. This forms a new string in your C# program. We use the string Insert method to place one string in the middle of another one—or at any other position.
Tip 1:
We can insert one string at any index into another. IndexOf can return a suitable index.
Tip 2:
Insert can be used to concatenate strings. But this is less efficient—concat, as with + is faster.
for(int i=3;i<=str.Length - 1;i+=4)
{
str=str.Insert(i,",");
}
Related
I strings in the format of name:key:dataLength:data and these strings can often be chained together. for example "aNum:n:4:9879aBool:b:1:taString:s:2:Hi" this would map to an object something like:
{
aNum: 9879,
aBool: true,
aString: "Hi"
}
I have a method for parsing a string in this format but I'm not sure whether it's use of substring is the most efficient way of pprocessing the string, is there a more efficient way of processing strings in this fashion (repeatedly chopping off the front section):
Map<string, dynamic> fromString(String s){
Map<String, dynamic> _internal = new Map();
int start = 0;
while(start < s.length){
int end;
List<String> parts = new List<String>(); //0 is name, 1 is key, 2 is data length, 3 is data
for(var i = 0; i < 4; i++){
end = i < 3 ? s.indexOf(':') : num.parse(parts[2]);
parts[i] = s.substring(start, end);
start = i < 3 ? end + 1 : end;
}
var tranType = _tranTypesByKey[parts[1]]; //this is just a map to an object which has a function that can convert the data section of the string into an object
_internal[parts[0]] = tranType._fromStr(parts[3]);
}
return _internal;
}
I would try s.split(':') and process the resulting list.
If you do a lot of such operations you should consider creating benchmarks tests, try different techniques and compare them.
If you would still need this line
s = i < 3 ? s.substring(idx + 1) : s.substring(idx);
I would avoid creating a new substring in each iteration but instead just keep track of the next position.
You have to decide how important performance is relative to readability and maintainability of the code.
That said, you should not be cutting off the head of the string repeatedly. That is guaranteed to be inefficient - it'll take time that is quadratic in the number of records in your string, just creating those tail strings.
For parsing each field, you can avoid doing substrings on the length and type fields. For the length field, you can build the number yourself:
int index = ...;
// index points to first digit of length.
int length = 0;
int charCode = source.codeUnitAt(index++);
while (charCode != CHAR_COLON) {
length = 10 * length + charCode - 0x30;
charCode = source.codeUnitAt(index++);
}
// index points to the first character of content.
Since lengths are usually small integers (less than 2<<31), this is likely to be more efficient than creating a substring and calling int.parse.
The type field is a single ASCII character, so you could use codeUnitAt to get its ASCII value instead of creating a single-character string (and then your content interpretation lookup will need to switch on character code instead of character string).
For parsing content, you could pass the source string, start index and length instead of creating a substring. Then the boolean parser can also just read the code unit instead of the singleton character string, the string parser can just make the substring, and the number parser will likely have to make a substring too and call double.parse.
It would be convenient if Dart had a double.parseSubstring(source, [int from = 0, int to]) that could parse a substring as a double without creating the substring.
I want an algorithm to remove all occurrences of a given character from a string in O(n) complexity or lower? (It should be INPLACE editing original string only)
eg.
String="aadecabaaab";
removeCharacter='a'
Output:"decbb"
Enjoy algo:
j = 0
for i in length(a):
if a[i] != symbol:
a[j] = a[i]
j = j + 1
finalize:
length(a) = j
You can't do it in place with a String because it's immutable, but here's an O(n) algorithm to do it in place with a char[]:
char[] chars = "aadecabaaab".toCharArray();
char removeCharacter = 'a';
int next = 0;
for (int cur = 0; cur < chars.length; ++cur) {
if (chars[cur] != removeCharacter) {
chars[next++] = chars[cur];
}
}
// chars[0] through chars[4] will have {d, e, c, b, b} and next will be 5
System.out.println(new String(chars, 0, next));
Strictly speaking, you can't remove anything from a String because the String class is immutable. But you can construct another String that has all characters from the original String except for the "character to remove".
Create a StringBuilder. Loop through all characters in the original String. If the current character is not the character to remove, then append it to the StringBuilder. After the loop ends, convert the StringBuilder to a String.
Yep. In a linear time, iterate over String, check using .charAt() if this is a removeCharacter, don't copy it to new String. If no, copy. That's it.
This probably shouldn't have the "java" tag since in Java, a String is immutable and you can't edit it in place. For a more general case, if you have an array of characters (in any programming language) and you want to modify the array "in place" without creating another array, it's easy enough to do with two indexes. One goes through every character in the array, and the other starts at the beginning and is incremented only when you see a character that isn't removeCharacter. Since I assume this is a homework assignment, I'll leave it at that and let you figure out the details.
import java.util.*;
import java.io.*;
public class removeA{
public static void main(String[] args){
String text = "This is a test string! Wow abcdefg.";
System.out.println(text.replaceAll("a",""));
}
}
Use a hash table to hold the data you want to remove. log N complexity.
std::string toRemove = "ad";
std::map<char, int> table;
size_t maxR = toRemove.size();
for (size_t n = 0; n < maxR; ++n)
{
table[toRemove[n]] = 0;
}
Then parse the whole string and remove when you get a hit (thestring is an array):
size_t counter = 0;
while(thestring[counter] != 0)
{
std::map<char,int>::iterator iter = table.find(thestring[counter]);
if (iter == table.end()) // we found a valid character!
{
++counter;
}
else
{
// move the data - dont increment counter
memcpy(&thestring[counter], &thestring[counter+1], max-counter);
// dont increment counter
}
}
EDIT: I hope this is not a technical test or something like that. =S
I have got a List of strings like:
String1
String1.String2
String1.String2.String3
Other1
Other1.Other2
Test1
Stuff1.Stuff1
Text1.Text2.Text3
Folder1.Folder2.FolderA
Folder1.Folder2.FolderB
Folder1.Folder2.FolderB.FolderC
Now I would like to group this into:
String1.String2.String3
Other1.Other2
Test1
Stuff1.Stuff1
Text1.Text2.Text3
Folder1.Folder2.FolderA
Folder1.Folder2.FolderB.FolderC
If
"String1" is in the next item "String1.String2" I will ignore the first one
and if the second item is in the third I will only take the third "String1.String2.String3"
and so on (n items). The string is structured like a node/path and could be split by a dot.
As you can see for the Folder example Folder2 has got two different Subfolder items so I would need both strings.
Do you know how to handle this with Linq? I would prefer VB.Net but C# is also ok.
Regards Athu
Dim r = input.Where(Function(e, i) i = input.Count - 1 OrElse Not input(i + 1).StartsWith(e + ".")).ToList()
Condition within Where method checks if element is last from input or is not followed by element, that contains current one.
That solution uses the fact, that input is List(Of String), so Count and input(i+1) are available on O(1) time.
LINQ isn't really the correct approach here, because you need to access more than one item at a time.
I would go with something like this:
public static IEnumerable<string> Filter(this IEnumerable<string> source)
{
string previous = null;
foreach(var current in source)
{
if(previous != null && !current.Contains(previous))
yield return previous;
previous = current;
}
yield return previous;
}
Usage:
var result = strings.Filter();
Pretty simple one. Try this:
var lst = new List<string> { /*...*/ };
var sorted =
from item in lst
where lst.Last() == item || !lst[lst.IndexOf(item) + 1].Contains(item)
select item;
the following simple line can do the trick, I'm not sure about the performance cost through
List<string> someStuff = new List<string>();
//Code to the strings here, code not added for brewity
IEnumerable<string> result = someStuff.Where(s => someStuff.Count(x => x.StartsWith(s)) == 1);
ArrayList arr = new ArrayList();
string abc =
What should I do to convert arraylist to a string such as abc = arr;Updated QuestOther consideration from which i can complete my work is concatination of string(need help in that manner ). suppose i have a string s="abcdefghi.."by applying foreach loop on it and getting char by matching some condition and concatinating every char value in some insatnce variable of string type i.e string subString=+;Something like thisstring tem = string.Empty;
string temp =string.Empty;
temp = string.Concat(tem,temp);
Using a little linq and making the assumption that your ArrayList contains string types:
using System.Linq;
var strings = new ArrayList().Cast<string>().ToArray();
var theString = string.Join(" ", strings);
Further reading:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/57a79xd0.aspx
For converting other types to string:
var strings = from object o in myArrayList
select o.ToString();
var theString = string.Join(" ", strings.ToArray());
The first argument to the Join method is the separator, I chose whitespace. It sounds like your chars should all contribute without a separator, so use "" or string.Empty instead.
Update: if you want to concatenate a small number of strings, the += operator will suffice:
var myString = "a";
myString += "b"; // Will equal "ab";
However, if you are planning on concatenating an indeterminate number of strings in a tight loop, use the StringBuilder:
using System.Text;
var sb = new StringBuilder();
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
sb.Append("a");
}
var myString = sb.ToString();
This avoids the cost of lots of string creations due to the immutability of strings.
Look into string.Join(), the opposite of string.Split()
You'll also need to convert your arr to string[], I guess that ToArray() will help you do that.
Personally and for memory preservation I’ll do for a concatenation:
System.Collections.ArrayList Collect = new System.Collections.ArrayList();
string temporary = string.Empty;
Collect.Add("Entry1");
Collect.Add("Entry2");
Collect.Add("Entry3");
foreach (String var in Collect)
{
temporary = temporary + var.ToString();
}
textBox1.Text = temporary;
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I saw this in an interview question ,
Given a sorting order string, you are asked to sort the input string based on the given sorting order string.
for example if the sorting order string is dfbcae
and the Input string is abcdeeabc
the output should be dbbccaaee.
any ideas on how to do this , in an efficient way ?
The Counting Sort option is pretty cool, and fast when the string to be sorted is long compared to the sort order string.
create an array where each index corresponds to a letter in the alphabet, this is the count array
for each letter in the sort target, increment the index in the count array which corresponds to that letter
for each letter in the sort order string
add that letter to the end of the output string a number of times equal to it's count in the count array
Algorithmic complexity is O(n) where n is the length of the string to be sorted. As the Wikipedia article explains we're able to beat the lower bound on standard comparison based sorting because this isn't a comparison based sort.
Here's some pseudocode.
char[26] countArray;
foreach(char c in sortTarget)
{
countArray[c - 'a']++;
}
int head = 0;
foreach(char c in sortOrder)
{
while(countArray[c - 'a'] > 0)
{
sortTarget[head] = c;
head++;
countArray[c - 'a']--;
}
}
Note: this implementation requires that both strings contain only lowercase characters.
Here's a nice easy to understand algorithm that has decent algorithmic complexity.
For each character in the sort order string
scan string to be sorted, starting at first non-ordered character (you can keep track of this character with an index or pointer)
when you find an occurrence of the specified character, swap it with the first non-ordered character
increment the index for the first non-ordered character
This is O(n*m), where n is the length of the string to be sorted and m is the length of the sort order string. We're able to beat the lower bound on comparison based sorting because this algorithm doesn't really use comparisons. Like Counting Sort it relies on the fact that you have a predefined finite external ordering set.
Here's some psuedocode:
int head = 0;
foreach(char c in sortOrder)
{
for(int i = head; i < sortTarget.length; i++)
{
if(sortTarget[i] == c)
{
// swap i with head
char temp = sortTarget[head];
sortTarget[head] = sortTarget[i];
sortTarget[i] = temp;
head++;
}
}
}
In Python, you can just create an index and use that in a comparison expression:
order = 'dfbcae'
input = 'abcdeeabc'
index = dict([ (y,x) for (x,y) in enumerate(order) ])
output = sorted(input, cmp=lambda x,y: index[x] - index[y])
print 'input=',''.join(input)
print 'output=',''.join(output)
gives this output:
input= abcdeeabc
output= dbbccaaee
Use binary search to find all the "split points" between different letters, then use the length of each segment directly. This will be asymptotically faster then naive counting sort, but will be harder to implement:
Use an array of size 26*2 to store the begin and end of each letter;
Inspect the middle element, see if it is different from the element left to it. If so, then this is the begin for the middle element and end for the element before it;
Throw away the segment with identical begin and end (if there are any), recursively apply this algorithm.
Since there are at most 25 "split"s, you won't have to do the search for more than 25 segemnts, and for each segment it is O(logn). Since this is constant * O(logn), the algorithm is O(nlogn).
And of course, just use counting sort will be easier to implement:
Use an array of size 26 to record the number of different letters;
Scan the input string;
Output the string in the given sorting order.
This is O(n), n being the length of the string.
Interview questions are generally about thought process and don't usually care too much about language features, but I couldn't resist posting a VB.Net 4.0 version anyway.
"Efficient" can mean two different things. The first is "what's the fastest way to make a computer execute a task" and the second is "what's the fastest that we can get a task done". They might sound the same but the first can mean micro-optimizations like int vs short, running timers to compare execution times and spending a week tweaking every millisecond out of an algorithm. The second definition is about how much human time would it take to create the code that does the task (hopefully in a reasonable amount of time). If code A runs 20 times faster than code B but code B took 1/20th of the time to write, depending on the granularity of the timer (1ms vs 20ms, 1 week vs 20 weeks), each version could be considered "efficient".
Dim input = "abcdeeabc"
Dim sort = "dfbcae"
Dim SortChars = sort.ToList()
Dim output = New String((From c In input.ToList() Select c Order By SortChars.IndexOf(c)).ToArray())
Trace.WriteLine(output)
Here is my solution to the question
import java.util.*;
import java.io.*;
class SortString
{
public static void main(String arg[])throws IOException
{
BufferedReader br=new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in));
// System.out.println("Enter 1st String :");
// System.out.println("Enter 1st String :");
// String s1=br.readLine();
// System.out.println("Enter 2nd String :");
// String s2=br.readLine();
String s1="tracctor";
String s2="car";
String com="";
String uncom="";
for(int i=0;i<s2.length();i++)
{
if(s1.contains(""+s2.charAt(i)))
{
com=com+s2.charAt(i);
}
}
System.out.println("Com :"+com);
for(int i=0;i<s1.length();i++)
if(!com.contains(""+s1.charAt(i)))
uncom=uncom+s1.charAt(i);
System.out.println("Uncom "+uncom);
System.out.println("Combined "+(com+uncom));
HashMap<String,Integer> h1=new HashMap<String,Integer>();
for(int i=0;i<s1.length();i++)
{
String m=""+s1.charAt(i);
if(h1.containsKey(m))
{
int val=(int)h1.get(m);
val=val+1;
h1.put(m,val);
}
else
{
h1.put(m,new Integer(1));
}
}
StringBuilder x=new StringBuilder();
for(int i=0;i<com.length();i++)
{
if(h1.containsKey(""+com.charAt(i)))
{
int count=(int)h1.get(""+com.charAt(i));
while(count!=0)
{x.append(""+com.charAt(i));count--;}
}
}
x.append(uncom);
System.out.println("Sort "+x);
}
}
Here is my version which is O(n) in time. Instead of unordered_map, I could have just used a char array of constant size. i.,e. char char_count[256] (and done ++char_count[ch - 'a'] ) assuming the input strings has all ASCII small characters.
string SortOrder(const string& input, const string& sort_order) {
unordered_map<char, int> char_count;
for (auto ch : input) {
++char_count[ch];
}
string res = "";
for (auto ch : sort_order) {
unordered_map<char, int>::iterator it = char_count.find(ch);
if (it != char_count.end()) {
string s(it->second, it->first);
res += s;
}
}
return res;
}
private static String sort(String target, String reference) {
final Map<Character, Integer> referencesMap = new HashMap<Character, Integer>();
for (int i = 0; i < reference.length(); i++) {
char key = reference.charAt(i);
if (!referencesMap.containsKey(key)) {
referencesMap.put(key, i);
}
}
List<Character> chars = new ArrayList<Character>(target.length());
for (int i = 0; i < target.length(); i++) {
chars.add(target.charAt(i));
}
Collections.sort(chars, new Comparator<Character>() {
#Override
public int compare(Character o1, Character o2) {
return referencesMap.get(o1).compareTo(referencesMap.get(o2));
}
});
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
for (Character c : chars) {
sb.append(c);
}
return sb.toString();
}
In C# I would just use the IComparer Interface and leave it to Array.Sort
void Main()
{
// we defin the IComparer class to define Sort Order
var sortOrder = new SortOrder("dfbcae");
var testOrder = "abcdeeabc".ToCharArray();
// sort the array using Array.Sort
Array.Sort(testOrder, sortOrder);
Console.WriteLine(testOrder.ToString());
}
public class SortOrder : IComparer
{
string sortOrder;
public SortOrder(string sortOrder)
{
this.sortOrder = sortOrder;
}
public int Compare(object obj1, object obj2)
{
var obj1Index = sortOrder.IndexOf((char)obj1);
var obj2Index = sortOrder.IndexOf((char)obj2);
if(obj1Index == -1 || obj2Index == -1)
{
throw new Exception("character not found");
}
if(obj1Index > obj2Index)
{
return 1;
}
else if (obj1Index == obj2Index)
{
return 0;
}
else
{
return -1;
}
}
}