I am just getting started learning the Golang language!
In for loop, I saw sometimes adding an underscore or without underscore.
Whatever add _ or not, I got the same result.
package main
import (
"fmt"
)
func main() {
doSomething()
sum := addValues(5, 8)
fmt.Println("The sum is", sum)
multiSum, multiCount := addAllValues(4, 7, 9)
fmt.Println("multisum", multiSum)
fmt.Println("multiCount", multiCount)
}
func doSomething() {
fmt.Println("Doing Something")
}
func addValues(value1 int, value2 int) int {
return value1 + value2
}
func addAllValues(values ...int) (int, int) {
total := 0
for _, v := range values {
total += v
}
return total, len(values)
}
func addAllValues(values ...int) (int, int) {
total := 0
for v := range values {
total += v
}
return total, len(values)
}
All I know is I don't care about the index. Is that all? or there is something more what I have to know??
I really appreciate your help!
For range over slices:
In for v := range values { the v is the index of the element in the slice.
In for _, v := range values { the v is the actual element value.
In for i, v := range values { the i is the index and the v is the element.
In for i, _ := range values { the i is the index of the element in the slice.
You can run this playground example to see the differences.
Range expression 1st value 2nd value
array or slice a [n]E, *[n]E, or []E index i int a[i] E
string s string type index i int see below rune
map m map[K]V key k K m[k] V
channel c chan E, <-chan E element e E
For more details see the spec.
If you don't want to use the variable that iterates in the loop, you can use _ to simply let Go ignore it:
mySlice := [int]{1,3,4,59,5}
for _,x := range mySlice {
fmt.Println(x)
}
By placing underscore you are telling the compiler this:
Ok, I'm aware that this function is returning something but I don't care! For example:
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
mul1, add1 := test_function(2, 3)
fmt.Println(mul1, add1)
mul2, _ := test_function(4, 5)
fmt.Println(mul2)
_, add3 := test_function(7, 8)
fmt.Println(add3)
}
func test_function(a int, b int) (mul int, add int) {
return a * b, a + b
}
just to add to the amazing answer above:
I think one of the main benefits is to maintain readability in your program: if you replace the blank identifier with a variable then you have to use it or your program will not compile.
also this decrease memory allocation be neglecting one of the returned parameters...
Related
When you print the result of a function with 2 return values, you will get
valA valB
Retrieving from a map can return either 1 value or two values:
v := m["Answer"]
v, ok := m["Answer"]
However, when you print m["Answer"], you will always only print v. What exactly is the "function signature" of a map retrieval? Or is this just a special case? Here is an example showing the distinction:
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
m := make(map[string]int)
m["Answer"] = 42
v, ok := m["Answer"]
fmt.Println("The value:", v, "Present:", ok)
fmt.Println(banana())
fmt.Println(m["Answer"])
}
func banana() (int, int) {
return 1, 2
}
Special case. The same applies to other operations, among others:
read from chan:
v, ok := <- somechannel
casting, e.g.:
casted, ok := somevar.(sometype)
I have a list of strings
elems := [n]string{...}
I want to perform a simple mapReduce operation, such that I
Map every string to a different string, let's say string -> $string
Reduce all the strings to one string with a separator, e.g. {s1, s2, s3} -> s1#s2#s3
all in all: {s1, s2, s3} -> $s1#$s2#$s3
What's the best way to do this?
I'm looking for efficiency and readability
Bonus points if it's generic enough to work not only on strings
For mapping just a list, you won't have much choice other than to go over each string. If the transform algo is time-consuming and you need speed, you can consider splitting the job and use a go routine. Finally you can use the strings.Join function which has an option to specify a separator, this normally performs the reduce part efficiently. The size of the dataset can also be a consideration, and for larger sized lists you may want to compare performance with strings.Join and your own customized algo and see if you want to use multiple go routines/channels to achieve what you want to.
If you don't need to do the 2 things separately, the end result can be achieved simply by using strings.Join():
package main
import (
"fmt"
"strings"
)
func main() {
a := []string{"a", "b", "c"}
p := "$"
fmt.Println(p + strings.Join(a[:], "#"+p))
}
prints $a#$b#$c
playground
Go is explicitly NOT a functional programming language.
You map and reduce using a for loop.
a := []string{"a", "b", "c"}
result := "initvalue"
for n, i := range a {
result += i + string(n)
}
If you are not going to perform any sort of IO operations inside your map functions (means they are doing just some computations), making it concurrent would make it slower for sure and even if you are doing some IO, you should benchmark. Concurrency would not make things faster necessarily and some times add unnecessary complications. In many cases just a simple for loop is sufficient.
If the map functions here are IO bound or are doing some sort of computation heavy calculations that do benefit from going concurrent, solutions can vary. For example NATS can be used to go beyond one machine and distribute the workload.
This is a relatively simple sample. Reduce phase is not multistage and is blocking:
import (
"fmt"
"strings"
"sync"
"testing"
"github.com/stretchr/testify/assert"
)
type elem struct {
index int
value interface{}
}
func feed(elems []interface{}) <-chan elem {
result := make(chan elem)
go func() {
for k, v := range elems {
e := elem{
index: k,
value: v,
}
result <- e
}
close(result)
}()
return result
}
func mapf(
input <-chan elem,
mapFunc func(elem) elem) <-chan elem {
result := make(chan elem)
go func() {
for e := range input {
eres := mapFunc(e)
result <- eres
}
close(result)
}()
return result
}
// is blocking
func reducef(
input <-chan elem,
reduceFunc func([]interface{}) interface{}) interface{} {
buffer := make(map[int]interface{})
l := 0
for v := range input {
buffer[v.index] = v.value
if v.index > l {
l = v.index
}
}
data := make([]interface{}, l+1)
for k, v := range buffer {
data[k] = v
}
return reduceFunc(data)
}
func fanOutIn(
elemFeed <-chan elem,
mapFunc func(elem) elem, mapCount int,
reduceFunc func([]interface{}) interface{}) interface{} {
MR := make(chan elem)
wg := &sync.WaitGroup{}
for i := 0; i < mapCount; i++ {
mapResult := mapf(elemFeed, mapFunc)
wg.Add(1)
go func() {
defer wg.Done()
for v := range mapResult {
MR <- v
}
}()
}
go func() {
wg.Wait()
close(MR)
}()
return reducef(MR, reduceFunc)
}
func Test01(t *testing.T) {
elemFeed := feed([]interface{}{1, 2, 3})
finalResult := fanOutIn(
elemFeed,
func(e elem) elem {
return elem{
index: e.index,
value: fmt.Sprintf("[%v]", e.value),
}
},
3,
func(sl []interface{}) interface{} {
strRes := make([]string, len(sl))
for k, v := range sl {
strRes[k] = v.(string)
}
return strings.Join(strRes, ":")
})
assert.Equal(t, "[1]:[2]:[3]", finalResult)
}
And since it uses interface{} as the element type, it can get generalized.
Is there any efficient way to get intersection of two slices in Go?
I want to avoid nested for loop like solution
slice1 := []string{"foo", "bar","hello"}
slice2 := []string{"foo", "bar"}
intersection(slice1, slice2)
=> ["foo", "bar"]
order of string does not matter
How do I get the intersection between two arrays as a new array?
Simple Intersection: Compare each element in A to each in B (O(n^2))
Hash Intersection: Put them into a hash table (O(n))
Sorted Intersection: Sort A and do an optimized intersection (O(n*log(n)))
All of which are implemented here
https://github.com/juliangruber/go-intersect
simple, generic and mutiple slices ! (Go 1.18)
Time Complexity : may be linear
func interSection[T constraints.Ordered](pS ...[]T) []T {
hash := make(map[T]*int) // value, counter
result := make([]T, 0)
for _, slice := range pS {
duplicationHash := make(map[T]bool) // duplication checking for individual slice
for _, value := range slice {
if _, isDup := duplicationHash[value]; !isDup { // is not duplicated in slice
if counter := hash[value]; counter != nil { // is found in hash counter map
if *counter++; *counter >= len(pS) { // is found in every slice
result = append(result, value)
}
} else { // not found in hash counter map
i := 1
hash[value] = &i
}
duplicationHash[value] = true
}
}
}
return result
}
func main() {
slice1 := []string{"foo", "bar", "hello"}
slice2 := []string{"foo", "bar"}
fmt.Println(interSection(slice1, slice2))
// [foo bar]
ints1 := []int{1, 2, 3, 9, 8}
ints2 := []int{10, 4, 2, 4, 8, 9} // have duplicated values
ints3 := []int{2, 4, 8, 1}
fmt.Println(interSection(ints1, ints2, ints3))
// [2 8]
}
playground : https://go.dev/play/p/lE79D0kOznZ
It's a best method for intersection two slice. Time complexity is too low.
Time Complexity : O(m+n)
m = length of first slice.
n = length of second slice.
func intersection(s1, s2 []string) (inter []string) {
hash := make(map[string]bool)
for _, e := range s1 {
hash[e] = true
}
for _, e := range s2 {
// If elements present in the hashmap then append intersection list.
if hash[e] {
inter = append(inter, e)
}
}
//Remove dups from slice.
inter = removeDups(inter)
return
}
//Remove dups from slice.
func removeDups(elements []string)(nodups []string) {
encountered := make(map[string]bool)
for _, element := range elements {
if !encountered[element] {
nodups = append(nodups, element)
encountered[element] = true
}
}
return
}
if there exists no blank in your []string, maybe you need this simple code:
func filter(src []string) (res []string) {
for _, s := range src {
newStr := strings.Join(res, " ")
if !strings.Contains(newStr, s) {
res = append(res, s)
}
}
return
}
func intersections(section1, section2 []string) (intersection []string) {
str1 := strings.Join(filter(section1), " ")
for _, s := range filter(section2) {
if strings.Contains(str1, s) {
intersection = append(intersection, s)
}
}
return
}
Try it
https://go.dev/play/p/eGGcyIlZD6y
first := []string{"one", "two", "three", "four"}
second := []string{"two", "four"}
result := intersection(first, second) // or intersection(second, first)
func intersection(first, second []string) []string {
out := []string{}
bucket := map[string]bool{}
for _, i := range first {
for _, j := range second {
if i == j && !bucket[i] {
out = append(out, i)
bucket[i] = true
}
}
}
return out
}
https://github.com/viant/toolbox/blob/a46fd679bbc5d07294b1d1b646aeacd44e2c7d50/collections.go#L869-L920
Another O(m+n) Time Complexity solution that uses a hashmap.
It has two differences compared to the other solutions discussed here.
Passing the target slice as a parameter instead of new slice returned
Faster to use for commonly used types like string/int instead of reflection for all
Yes there are a few different ways to go about it.. Here's an example that can be optimized.
package main
import "fmt"
func intersection(a []string, b []string) (inter []string) {
// interacting on the smallest list first can potentailly be faster...but not by much, worse case is the same
low, high := a, b
if len(a) > len(b) {
low = b
high = a
}
done := false
for i, l := range low {
for j, h := range high {
// get future index values
f1 := i + 1
f2 := j + 1
if l == h {
inter = append(inter, h)
if f1 < len(low) && f2 < len(high) {
// if the future values aren't the same then that's the end of the intersection
if low[f1] != high[f2] {
done = true
}
}
// we don't want to interate on the entire list everytime, so remove the parts we already looped on will make it faster each pass
high = high[:j+copy(high[j:], high[j+1:])]
break
}
}
// nothing in the future so we are done
if done {
break
}
}
return
}
func main() {
slice1 := []string{"foo", "bar", "hello", "bar"}
slice2 := []string{"foo", "bar"}
fmt.Printf("%+v\n", intersection(slice1, slice2))
}
Now the intersection method defined above will only operate on slices of strings, like your example.. You can in theory create a definition that looks like this func intersection(a []interface, b []interface) (inter []interface), however you would be relying on reflection and type casting so that you can compare, which will add latency and make your code harder to read. It's probably easier to maintain and read to write a separate function for each type you care about.
func intersectionString(a []string, b []string) (inter []string),
func intersectionInt(a []int, b []int) (inter []int),
func intersectionFloat64(a []Float64, b []Float64) (inter []Float64), ..ect
You can then create your own package and reuse once you settle how you want to implement it.
package intersection
func String(a []string, b []string) (inter []string)
func Int(a []int, b []int) (inter []int)
func Float64(a []Float64, b []Float64) (inter []Float64)
Suppose I would like to apply a function to every element in a list, and then put the resulting values in another list so I can immediately use them. In python, I would do something like this:
list = [1,2,3]
str = ', '.join(multiply(x, 2) for x in list)
In Go, I do something like this:
list := []int{1,2,3}
list2 := []int
for _,x := range list {
list2 := append(list2, multiply(x, 2))
}
str := strings.Join(list2, ", ")
Is it possible to do this in a shorter way?
I would do exactly as you did, with a few tweaks to fix typos
import (
"fmt"
"strconv"
"strings"
)
func main() {
list := []int{1,2,3}
var list2 []string
for _, x := range list {
list2 = append(list2, strconv.Itoa(x * 2)) // note the = instead of :=
}
str := strings.Join(list2, ", ")
fmt.Println(str)
}
This is an old question, but was the top hit in my Google search, and I found information that I believe will be helpful to the OP and anyone else who arrives here, looking for the same thing.
There is a shorter way, although you have to write the map function yourself.
In go, func is a type, which allows you to write a function that accepts as input the subject slice and a function, and which iterates over that slice, applying that function.
See the Map function near the bottom of this Go by Example page : https://gobyexample.com/collection-functions
I've included it here for reference:
func Map(vs []string, f func(string) string) []string {
vsm := make([]string, len(vs))
for i, v := range vs {
vsm[i] = f(v)
}
return vsm
}
You then call it like so:
fmt.Println(Map(strs, strings.ToUpper))
So, yes: The shorter way you are looking for exists, although it is not built into the language itself.
I've created a small utility package with Mapand Filter methods now that generics have been introduced in 1.18 :)
https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/sa-/slicefunk
Example usage
package main
import (
"fmt"
sf "github.com/sa-/slicefunk"
)
func main() {
original := []int{1, 2, 3, 4, 5}
newArray := sf.Map(original, func(item int) int { return item + 1 })
newArray = sf.Map(newArray, func(item int) int { return item * 3 })
newArray = sf.Filter(newArray, func(item int) bool { return item%2 == 0 })
fmt.Println(newArray)
}
With go1.18+ you can write a much cleaner generic Map function:
func Map[T, V any](ts []T, fn func(T) V) []V {
result := make([]V, len(ts))
for i, t := range ts {
result[i] = fn(t)
}
return result
}
Usage, e.g:
input := []int{4, 5, 3}
outputInts := Map(input, func(item int) int { return item + 1 })
outputStrings := Map(input, func(item int) string { return fmt.Sprintf("Item:%d", item) })
Found a way to define a generic map array function
func Map(t interface{}, f func(interface{}) interface{} ) []interface{} {
switch reflect.TypeOf(t).Kind() {
case reflect.Slice:
s := reflect.ValueOf(t)
arr := make([]interface{}, s.Len())
for i := 0; i < s.Len(); i++ {
arr[i] = f(s.Index(i).Interface())
}
return arr
}
return nil
}
origin := []int{4,5,3}
newArray := Map(origin, func(item interface{}) interface{} { return item.(int) + 1})
You can use lo's Map in order to quickly apply a function to all elements. For example, in order to multiply by 2 and convert to string, you can use:
l := lo.Map[int, string]([]int{1, 2, 3, 4}, func(x int, _ int) string { return strconv.Itoa(x * 2) })
Then you can convert back to a comma delimited string like so:
strings.Join(l, ",")
Is there a foreach construct in the Go language?
Can I iterate over a slice or array using a for?
From For statements with range clause:
A "for" statement with a "range" clause iterates through all entries
of an array, slice, string or map, or values received on a channel.
For each entry it assigns iteration values to corresponding iteration
variables and then executes the block.
As an example:
for index, element := range someSlice {
// index is the index where we are
// element is the element from someSlice for where we are
}
If you don't care about the index, you can use _:
for _, element := range someSlice {
// element is the element from someSlice for where we are
}
The underscore, _, is the blank identifier, an anonymous placeholder.
Go has a foreach-like syntax. It supports arrays/slices, maps and channels.
Iterate over an array or a slice:
// index and value
for i, v := range slice {}
// index only
for i := range slice {}
// value only
for _, v := range slice {}
Iterate over a map:
// key and value
for key, value := range theMap {}
// key only
for key := range theMap {}
// value only
for _, value := range theMap {}
Iterate over a channel:
for v := range theChan {}
Iterating over a channel is equivalent to receiving from a channel until it is closed:
for {
v, ok := <-theChan
if !ok {
break
}
}
Following is the example code for how to use foreach in Go:
package main
import (
"fmt"
)
func main() {
arrayOne := [3]string{"Apple", "Mango", "Banana"}
for index,element := range arrayOne{
fmt.Println(index)
fmt.Println(element)
}
}
This is a running example https://play.golang.org/p/LXptmH4X_0
Yes, range:
The range form of the for loop iterates over a slice or map.
When ranging over a slice, two values are returned for each iteration. The first is the index, and the second is a copy of the element at that index.
Example:
package main
import "fmt"
var pow = []int{1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128}
func main() {
for i, v := range pow {
fmt.Printf("2**%d = %d\n", i, v)
}
for i := range pow {
pow[i] = 1 << uint(i) // == 2**i
}
for _, value := range pow {
fmt.Printf("%d\n", value)
}
}
You can skip the index or value by assigning to _.
If you only want the index, drop the , value entirely.
The following example shows how to use the range operator in a for loop to implement a foreach loop.
func PrintXml (out io.Writer, value interface{}) error {
var data []byte
var err error
for _, action := range []func() {
func () { data, err = xml.MarshalIndent(value, "", " ") },
func () { _, err = out.Write([]byte(xml.Header)) },
func () { _, err = out.Write(data) },
func () { _, err = out.Write([]byte("\n")) }} {
action();
if err != nil {
return err
}
}
return nil;
}
The example iterates over an array of functions to unify the error handling for the functions. A complete example is at Google´s playground.
PS: it shows also that hanging braces are a bad idea for the readability of code. Hint: the for condition ends just before the action() call. Obvious, isn't it?
You can in fact use range without referencing its return values by using for range against your type:
arr := make([]uint8, 5)
i,j := 0,0
for range arr {
fmt.Println("Array Loop", i)
i++
}
for range "bytes" {
fmt.Println("String Loop", j)
j++
}
https://play.golang.org/p/XHrHLbJMEd
This may be obvious, but you can inline the array like so:
package main
import (
"fmt"
)
func main() {
for _, element := range [3]string{"a", "b", "c"} {
fmt.Print(element)
}
}
outputs:
abc
https://play.golang.org/p/gkKgF3y5nmt
I'm seeing a lot of examples using range. Just a heads up that range creates a copy of whatever you're iterating over. If you make changes to the contents in a foreach range you will not be changing the values in the original container, in that case you'll need a traditional for loop with an index you increment and deference indexed reference. E.g.:
for i := 0; i < len(arr); i++ {
element := &arr[i]
element.Val = newVal
}
I have just implemented this library: https://github.com/jose78/go-collection.
This is an example of how to use the Foreach loop:
package main
import (
"fmt"
col "github.com/jose78/go-collection/collections"
)
type user struct {
name string
age int
id int
}
func main() {
newList := col.ListType{user{"Alvaro", 6, 1}, user{"Sofia", 3, 2}}
newList = append(newList, user{"Mon", 0, 3})
newList.Foreach(simpleLoop)
if err := newList.Foreach(simpleLoopWithError); err != nil{
fmt.Printf("This error >>> %v <<< was produced", err )
}
}
var simpleLoop col.FnForeachList = func(mapper interface{}, index int) {
fmt.Printf("%d.- item:%v\n", index, mapper)
}
var simpleLoopWithError col.FnForeachList = func(mapper interface{}, index int) {
if index > 1{
panic(fmt.Sprintf("Error produced with index == %d\n", index))
}
fmt.Printf("%d.- item:%v\n", index, mapper)
}
The result of this execution should be:
0.- item:{Alvaro 6 1}
1.- item:{Sofia 3 2}
2.- item:{Mon 0 3}
0.- item:{Alvaro 6 1}
1.- item:{Sofia 3 2}
Recovered in f Error produced with index == 2
ERROR: Error produced with index == 2
This error >>> Error produced with index == 2
<<< was produced
Try this code in playGrounD.