Check multiple rangeOfString (Swift) - string

How do I perform multiple rangeOfString's but only if the value being checked has a value?
E.g. below
var string1 = "hello"
var string2 = "world"
var checker1 = "he"
var checker2 = ""
if string1.lowercaseString.rangeOfString(checker1) != nil {
println("exists1")
}
//SHOULD not perform below as the value below as "checker2" is empty.
if string2.lowercaseString.rangeOfString(checker2) != nil {
println("exists2")
}

You could just add a check if the string is non-empty:
if checker2 != "" && string2.lowercaseString.rangeOfString(checker2) != nil {
println("exists2")
}
But that is actually not necessary because rangeOfString() returns nil if called
with an empty argument. And if you rewrite the test as
if string2.rangeOfString(checker2, options: .CaseInsensitiveSearch) != nil {
println("exists2")
}
then there is even no overhead for the lowercaseString conversion in the empty
string case.

Related

How to Return Nil String in Go?

I have a function which returns a string under certain circumstances, namely when the program runs in Linux or MacOS, otherwise the return value should be nil in order to omit some OS-specific checks further in code.
func test() (response string) {
if runtime.GOOS != "linux" {
return nil
} else {
/* blablabla*/
}
}
however when I try to compile this code I get an error:
test.go:10:3: cannot use nil as type string in return argument.
If I return just an empty string like return "", I cannot compare this return value with nil further in code.
So the question is how to return a correct nil string value?
If you can't use "", return a pointer of type *string; or–since this is Go–you may declare multiple return values, such as: (response string, ok bool).
Using *string: return nil pointer when you don't have a "useful" string to return. When you do, assign it to a local variable, and return its address.
func test() (response *string) {
if runtime.GOOS != "linux" {
return nil
} else {
ret := "useful"
return &ret
}
}
Using multiple return values: when you have a useful string to return, return it with ok = true, e.g.:
return "useful", true
Otherwise:
return "", false
This is how it would look like:
func test() (response string, ok bool) {
if runtime.GOOS != "linux" {
return "", false
} else {
return "useful", true
}
}
At the caller, first check the ok return value. If that's true, you may use the string value. Otherwise, consider it useless.
Also see related questions:
How do I represent an Optional String in Go?
Alternatives for obtaining and returning a pointer to string: How do I do a literal *int64 in Go?
Go has built-in support for multiple return values:
This feature is used often in idiomatic Go, for example to return both result and error values from a function.
In your case it could be like this:
func test() (response string, err error) {
if runtime.GOOS != "linux" {
return "", nil
} else {
/* blablabla*/
}
}
And then:
response, err := test()
if err != nil {
// Error handling code
return;
}
// Normal code
If you want to ignore the error, simply use _:
response, _ := test()
// Normal code
Go allows multiple return types. So use this to your advantage and return an error or any other type. Check this out for more info: http://golangtutorials.blogspot.com/2011/06/return-values-from-go-functions.html?m=1

How do I check if a String includes a specific Character?

How do I check if a String includes a specific Character?
For example:
if !emailString.hasCharacter("#") {
println("Email must contain at sign.")
}
You can use the free-standing find function, like this:
let s = "hello"
if (find(s, "x") != nil) {
println("Found X")
}
if (find(s, "l") != nil) {
println("Found L")
}
Here you go:
if emailString.rangeOfString("#") != nil{
println("# exists")
}
You can use this
if emailString.rangeOfString("#") == nil {
println("Email must contain at sign.")
}

How to convert a 'string pointer' to a string in Golang?

Is it possible to get the string value from a pointer to a string?
I am using the goopt package to handle flag parsing and the package returns *string only. I want to use these values to call a function in a map.
Example
var strPointer = new(string)
*strPointer = "string"
functions := map[string]func() {
"string": func(){
fmt.Println("works")
},
}
//Do something to get the string value
functions[strPointerValue]()
returns
./prog.go:17:14: cannot use strPointer (type *string)
as type string in map index
Dereference the pointer:
strPointerValue := *strPointer
A simple function that first checks if the string pointer is nil would prevent runtime errors:
func DerefString(s *string) string {
if s != nil {
return *s
}
return ""
}
Generic https://stackoverflow.com/a/62790458/1079543 :
func SafeDeref[T any](p *T) T {
if p == nil {
var v T
return v
}
return *p
}

Comparing String.Index values

Is it possible to compare two String.Index values in Swift? I'm trying to process a string character by character, and several times I need to check if I am at the end of the string. I've tried just doing
while (currentIndex < string.endIndex) {
//do things...
currentIndex = currentIndex.successor()
}
Which complained about type conversions. Then, I tried defining and overload for < as such:
#infix func <(lhs: String.Index, rhs: String.Index) -> Bool {
var ret = true //what goes here?
return ret
}
Which gets rid of compilation errors, but I have no clue what to do in order to compare lhs and rhs properly. Is this the way I should go about using String.Index, or is there a better way to compare them?
The simplest option is the distance() function:
var string = "Hello World"
var currentIndex = string.startIndex
while (distance(currentIndex, string.endIndex) >= 0) {
println("currentIndex: \(currentIndex)")
currentIndex = currentIndex.successor()
}
Beware distance() has O(N) performance, so avoid it for large strings. However, the entire String class doesn't currently handle large strings anyway — you should probably switch to CFString if performance is critical.
Using an operator overload is a bad idea, but just as a learning exercise this is how you'd do it:
var string = "Hello World"
var currentIndex = string.startIndex
#infix func <(lhs: String.Index, rhs: String.Index) -> Bool {
return distance(lhs, rhs) > 0
}
while (currentIndex < string.endIndex) {
currentIndex = currentIndex.successor()
}
String indexes support = and !=. String indexes are an opaque type, not integers and can not be compared like integers.
Use: if (currentIndex != string.endIndex)
var currentIndex = string.startIndex
while (currentIndex != string.endIndex) {
println("currentIndex: \(currentIndex)")
currentIndex = currentIndex.successor()
}
I believe this REPL/Playground example should illuminate what you (and others) need to know about working with the String.Index concept.
// This will be our working example
let exampleString = "this is a string"
// And here we'll call successor a few times to get an index partway through the example
var someIndexInTheMiddle = exampleString.startIndex
for _ in 1...5 {
someIndexInTheMiddle = someIndexInTheMiddle.successor()
}
// And here we will iterate that string and detect when our current index is relative in one of three different possible ways to the character selected previously
println("\n\nsomeIndexInTheMiddle = \(exampleString[someIndexInTheMiddle])")
for var index: String.Index = exampleString.startIndex; index != exampleString.endIndex; index = index.successor() {
println(" - \(exampleString[index])")
if index != exampleString.startIndex && index.predecessor() == someIndexInTheMiddle {
println("current character comes after someIndexInTheMiddle")
} else if index == someIndexInTheMiddle {
println("current character is the one indicated by someIndexInTheMiddle")
} else if index != exampleString.endIndex && index.successor() == someIndexInTheMiddle {
println("Current character comes before someIndexinTheMiddle")
}
}
Hopefully that provides the necessary information.
Whatever way you decide to iterator over a String, you will immediately want to capture the iteration in a function that can be repeatedly invoked while using a closure applied to each string character. As in:
extension String {
func each (f: (Character) -> Void) {
for var index = self.startIndex;
index < self.endIndex;
index = index.successor() {
f (string[index])
}
}
}
Apple already provides these for C-Strings and will for general strings as soon as they get character access solidified.

Comparing pointers fails mystically in VC++

I have a tree structure and I want to find all nodes matching a given criteria. Each time I call the find function, it returns next matching node. Children are searched by recursive function call.
For some reason a key comparison of pointers fails for this implementation. Please see the code below, I have pointed out the failing comparison.
HtmlTag* HtmlContent::FindTag(string tagName, string tagParameterContent)
{
if (tagName.empty() && tagParameterContent.empty())
return NULL;
if (this->startTag == NULL)
return NULL;
this->findContinue = this->FindChildren(this->startTag, &tagName, &tagParameterContent);
return this->findContinue;
}
HtmlTag* HtmlContent::FindChildren(HtmlTag* firstTag, string* tagName, string* tagParameterContent)
{
HtmlTag* currentTag = firstTag;
HtmlTag* childrenFound = NULL;
while (currentTag != NULL)
{
if (!tagName->empty() && *tagName == currentTag->tagName)
{
if (tagParameterContent->empty() || currentTag->tagParameters.find(*tagParameterContent, 0) != -1)
{
if (this->findContinue == NULL)
break; // break now when found
else if (this->findContinue == currentTag) // TODO why this fails?
this->findContinue == NULL; // break on next find
}
}
if (currentTag->pFirstChild != NULL)
{
childrenFound = this->FindChildren(currentTag->pFirstChild, tagName, tagParameterContent);
if (childrenFound != NULL)
{
currentTag = childrenFound;
break;
}
}
currentTag = currentTag->pNextSibling;
}
return currentTag;
}
VC++ compiler accepts this code but for some reason I can't put a breakpoint on this comparison. I guess this is optimized out, but why? Why this comparison fails?
I think that you shoud replace == with = in assignment after comparison. Compiler optimalized this whole section because it doesnt do anything useful.

Resources