I got this code
val numberOfStars = urlString.length - index
val result = urlString.replaceRange(index+1..urlString.length - 1,"*") //Here
I need to repeat replacing of character with "*" by numberOfStars. Now it replace only once. And I have result like this somehere=* but I need if numberOfStars=5 the result will be somehere=*****
AFAIK there is no method out of the box .... but you can do it like
val result = urlString.replaceRange(index+1..urlString.length - 1,"*".repeat(numberOfStars))
Since you want to replace everything from index to the end of the string, it is not really necessary to use replaceRange. The following is a bit less redundant, because you do not need to write the length of the urlString twice:
val numberOfStars = urlString.length - index
val result = urlString.substring(0, index + 1) + "*".repeat(numberOfStars)
It would also be possible to do it like this:
val result = urlString.mapIndexed { i, c -> if(i > index) "*" else c }
.joinToString(separator = "")
Related
In pre-Swift 2.0 sample code, I've come across something like:
var val = "hello" + Repeat(count: paddingAmount, repeatedValue: "-") + "."
In Xcode 7.0/Swift 2.0 Playground, this produces the error:
note: expected an argument list of type '(String, String)'
How would you use the Repeat collection and get the value that's held by the collection for use?
String has an initializer that will return a string of repeated characters, I would recommend using that in your case:
let padding = String(count: paddingAmount, repeatedValue: Character("-"))
var val = "hello" + padding + "."
It's now Array(count: paddingAmount, repeatedValue: "-").
My challenge is twofold:
To pick individual strings from an array of similar strings, but only if a boolean test has been passed first.
"Finally" I need to concatenate any/all of the strings generated into one complete text and the entire code must be in Swift.
Illustration: A back of the envelope code for illustration of logic:
generatedText.text =
case Int1 <= 50 && Int2 == 50
return generatedParagraph1 = pick one string at RANDOM from a an array1 of strings
case Int3 =< 100
return generatedParagraph2 = pick one string at RANDOM from a an array2 of strings
case Int4 == 100
return generatedParagraph3 = pick one string at RANDOM from a an array3 of strings
...etc
default
return "Nothing to report"
and concatenate the individual generatedParagraphs
Attempt: Code picks a random element within stringArray1, 2 and 3.
Example of what the code returns:
---> "Sentence1_c.Sentence2_a.Sentence3_b."
PROBLEM: I need the code to ONLY pick an element if it has first passed a boolean. It means that the final concatenated string (concastString) could be empty, just contain one element, or several depending on how many of the bools were True. Does anyone know how to do this?
import Foundation
var stringArray1 = ["","Sentence1_a.", "Sentence1_b.", "Sentence1_c."]
var stringArray2 = ["","Sentence2_a.", "Sentence2_b.", "Sentence2_c."]
var stringArray3 = ["","Sentence3_a.", "Sentence3_b.", "Sentence3_c."]
let count1 = UInt32(stringArray1.count)-1
let count2 = UInt32(stringArray2.count)-1
let count3 = UInt32(stringArray3.count)-1
var randomNumberOne = Int(arc4random_uniform(count1))+1
var randomNumberTwo = Int(arc4random_uniform(count2))+1
var randomNumberThree = Int(arc4random_uniform(count3))+1
let concatString = stringArray1[randomNumberOne] + stringArray2[randomNumberTwo] + stringArray3[randomNumberThree]
Okay, I didn't pass a Bool, but I show concatenating three random strings from a [String]. I ran this in a playground.
import Foundation
var stringArray = [String]()
for var i = 0; i < 100; i++ {
stringArray.append("text" + "\(i)")
}
func concat (array: [String]) -> String {
let count = UInt32(stringArray.count)
let randomNumberOne = Int(arc4random_uniform(count))
let randomNumberTwo = Int(arc4random_uniform(count))
let randomNumberThree = Int(arc4random_uniform(count))
let concatString = array[randomNumberOne] + array[randomNumberTwo] + array[randomNumberThree]
return concatString
}
let finalString = concat(stringArray)
Below code runs a comparison of users and writes to file. I've removed some code to make it as concise as possible but speed is an issue also in this code :
import scala.collection.JavaConversions._
object writedata {
def getDistance(str1: String, str2: String) = {
val zipped = str1.zip(str2)
val numberOfEqualSequences = zipped.count(_ == ('1', '1')) * 2
val p = zipped.count(_ == ('1', '1')).toFloat * 2
val q = zipped.count(_ == ('1', '0')).toFloat * 2
val r = zipped.count(_ == ('0', '1')).toFloat * 2
val s = zipped.count(_ == ('0', '0')).toFloat * 2
(q + r) / (p + q + r)
} //> getDistance: (str1: String, str2: String)Float
case class UserObj(id: String, nCoordinate: String)
val userList = new java.util.ArrayList[UserObj] //> userList : java.util.ArrayList[writedata.UserObj] = []
for (a <- 1 to 100) {
userList.add(new UserObj("2", "101010"))
}
def using[A <: { def close(): Unit }, B](param: A)(f: A => B): B =
try { f(param) } finally { param.close() } //> using: [A <: AnyRef{def close(): Unit}, B](param: A)(f: A => B)B
def appendToFile(fileName: String, textData: String) =
using(new java.io.FileWriter(fileName, true)) {
fileWriter =>
using(new java.io.PrintWriter(fileWriter)) {
printWriter => printWriter.println(textData)
}
} //> appendToFile: (fileName: String, textData: String)Unit
var counter = 0; //> counter : Int = 0
for (xUser <- userList.par) {
userList.par.map(yUser => {
if (!xUser.id.isEmpty && !yUser.id.isEmpty)
synchronized {
appendToFile("c:\\data-files\\test.txt", getDistance(xUser.nCoordinate , yUser.nCoordinate).toString)
}
})
}
}
The above code was previously an imperative solution, so the .par functionality was within an inner and outer loop. I'm attempting to convert it to a more functional implementation while also taking advantage of Scala's parallel collections framework.
In this example the data set size is 10 but in the code im working on
the size is 8000 which translates to 64'000'000 comparisons. I'm
using a synchronized block so that multiple threads are not writing
to same file at same time. A performance improvment im considering
is populating a separate collection within the inner loop ( userList.par.map(yUser => {)
and then writing that collection out to seperate file.
Are there other methods I can use to improve performance. So that I can
handle a List that contains 8000 items instead of above example of 100 ?
I'm not sure if you removed too much code for clarity, but from what I can see, there is absolutely nothing that can run in parallel since the only thing you are doing is writing to a file.
EDIT:
One thing that you should do is to move the getDistance(...) computation before the synchronized call to appendToFile, otherwise your parallelized code ends up being sequential.
Instead of calling a synchronized appendToFile, I would call appendToFile in a non-synchronized way, but have each call to that method add the new line to some synchronized queue. Then I would have another thread that flushes that queue to disk periodically. But then you would also need to add something to make sure that the queue is also flushed when all computations are done. So that could get complicated...
Alternatively, you could also keep your code and simply drop the synchronization around the call to appendToFile. It seems that println itself is synchronized. However, that would be risky since println is not officially synchronized and it could change in future versions.
I wrote a new combinator for my parser in scala.
Its a variation of the ^^ combinator, which passes position information on.
But accessing the position information of the input element really cost performance.
In my case parsing a big example need around 3 seconds without position information, with it needs over 30 seconds.
I wrote a runnable example where the runtime is about 50% more when accessing the position.
Why is that? How can I get a better runtime?
Example:
import scala.util.parsing.combinator.RegexParsers
import scala.util.parsing.combinator.Parsers
import scala.util.matching.Regex
import scala.language.implicitConversions
object FooParser extends RegexParsers with Parsers {
var withPosInfo = false
def b: Parser[String] = regexB("""[a-z]+""".r) ^^# { case (b, x) => b + " ::" + x.toString }
def regexB(p: Regex): BParser[String] = new BParser(regex(p))
class BParser[T](p: Parser[T]) {
def ^^#[U](f: ((Int, Int), T) => U): Parser[U] = Parser { in =>
val source = in.source
val offset = in.offset
val start = handleWhiteSpace(source, offset)
val inwo = in.drop(start - offset)
p(inwo) match {
case Success(t, in1) =>
{
var a = 3
var b = 4
if(withPosInfo)
{ // takes a lot of time
a = inwo.pos.line
b = inwo.pos.column
}
Success(f((a, b), t), in1)
}
case ns: NoSuccess => ns
}
}
}
def main(args: Array[String]) = {
val r = "foo"*50000000
var now = System.nanoTime
parseAll(b, r)
var us = (System.nanoTime - now) / 1000
println("without: %d us".format(us))
withPosInfo = true
now = System.nanoTime
parseAll(b, r)
us = (System.nanoTime - now) / 1000
println("with : %d us".format(us))
}
}
Output:
without: 2952496 us
with : 4591070 us
Unfortunately, I don't think you can use the same approach. The problem is that line numbers end up implemented by scala.util.parsing.input.OffsetPosition which builds a list of every line break every time it is created. So if it ends up with string input it will parse the entire thing on every call to pos (twice in your example). See the code for CharSequenceReader and OffsetPosition for more details.
There is one quick thing you can do to speed this up:
val ip = inwo.pos
a = ip.line
b = ip.column
to at least avoid creating pos twice. But that still leaves you with a lot of redundant work. I'm afraid to really solve the problem you'll have to build the index as in OffsetPosition yourself, just once, and then keep referring to it.
You could also file a bug report / make an enhancement request. This is not a very good way to implement the feature.
This is Crystal Reports 9 in Visual Studio 2003 by the way
Simple question about crystal reports formula syntax: How do I build the formula's result using if then clauses?
Specifically I would like something like this:
dim val as string
val = {table.level}
if {table.uom_id} = 5 then
val = val & ' feet'
else
val = val $ ' meters'
end if
and val should be the result of the formula.
As long as we're at it, are there any shortcuts for writing these? These are horribly verbose, the ternary operator would be very welcome.
Your example is close. Just use Crystal syntax, as shown here:
stringvar val := {table.level};
if {table.uom_id} = 5 then
val := val + ' feet'
else
val := val + ' meters';
//to return a value, just plop it down at the end
val
But if you want something a little more concise, use this:
if {table.uom_id} = 5 then
{table.level} + ' feet'
else
{table.level} + ' meters';