I am trying to find a solution to check for equality in 2 slices. Unfortanely, the answers I have found require values in the slice to be in the same order. For example, http://play.golang.org/p/yV0q1_u3xR evaluates equality to false.
I want a solution that lets []string{"a","b","c"} == []string{"b","a","c"} evaluate to true.
MORE EXAMPLES
[]string{"a","a","c"} == []string{"c","a","c"} >>> false
[]string{"z","z","x"} == []string{"x","z","z"} >>> true
Here is an alternate solution, though perhaps a bit verbose:
func sameStringSlice(x, y []string) bool {
if len(x) != len(y) {
return false
}
// create a map of string -> int
diff := make(map[string]int, len(x))
for _, _x := range x {
// 0 value for int is 0, so just increment a counter for the string
diff[_x]++
}
for _, _y := range y {
// If the string _y is not in diff bail out early
if _, ok := diff[_y]; !ok {
return false
}
diff[_y] -= 1
if diff[_y] == 0 {
delete(diff, _y)
}
}
return len(diff) == 0
}
Try it on the Go Playground
You can use cmp.Diff together with cmpopts.SortSlices:
less := func(a, b string) bool { return a < b }
equalIgnoreOrder := cmp.Diff(x, y, cmpopts.SortSlices(less)) == ""
Here is a full example that runs on the Go Playground:
package main
import (
"fmt"
"github.com/google/go-cmp/cmp"
"github.com/google/go-cmp/cmp/cmpopts"
)
func main() {
x := []string{"a", "b", "c"}
y := []string{"a", "c", "b"}
less := func(a, b string) bool { return a < b }
equalIgnoreOrder := cmp.Diff(x, y, cmpopts.SortSlices(less)) == ""
fmt.Println(equalIgnoreOrder) // prints "true"
}
The other answers have better time complexity O(N) vs (O(N log(N)), that are in my answer, also my solution will take up more memory if elements in the slices are repeated frequently, but I wanted to add it because I think this is the most straight forward way to do it:
package main
import (
"fmt"
"sort"
"reflect"
)
func array_sorted_equal(a, b []string) bool {
if len(a) != len(b) {return false }
a_copy := make([]string, len(a))
b_copy := make([]string, len(b))
copy(a_copy, a)
copy(b_copy, b)
sort.Strings(a_copy)
sort.Strings(b_copy)
return reflect.DeepEqual(a_copy, b_copy)
}
func main() {
a := []string {"a", "a", "c"}
b := []string {"c", "a", "c"}
c := []string {"z","z","x"}
d := []string {"x","z","z"}
fmt.Println( array_sorted_equal(a, b))
fmt.Println( array_sorted_equal(c, d))
}
Result:
false
true
I would think the easiest way would be to map the elements in each array/slice to their number of occurrences, then compare the maps:
func main() {
x := []string{"a","b","c"}
y := []string{"c","b","a"}
xMap := make(map[string]int)
yMap := make(map[string]int)
for _, xElem := range x {
xMap[xElem]++
}
for _, yElem := range y {
yMap[yElem]++
}
for xMapKey, xMapVal := range xMap {
if yMap[xMapKey] != xMapVal {
return false
}
}
return true
}
You'll need to add some additional due dilligence, like short circuiting if your arrays/slices contain elements of different types or are of different length.
Generalizing the code of testify ElementsMatch, solution to compare any kind of objects (in the example []map[string]string):
https://play.golang.org/p/xUS2ngrUWUl
Like adrianlzt wrote in his answer, an implementation of assert.ElementsMatch from testify can be used to achieve that. But how about reusing actual testify module instead of copying that code when all you need is a bool result of the comparison? The implementation in testify is intended for tests code and usually takes testing.T argument.
It turns out that ElementsMatch can be quite easily used outside of testing code. All it takes is a dummy implementation of an interface with ErrorF method:
type dummyt struct{}
func (t dummyt) Errorf(string, ...interface{}) {}
func elementsMatch(listA, listB interface{}) bool {
return assert.ElementsMatch(dummyt{}, listA, listB)
}
Or test it on The Go Playground, which I've adapted from the adrianlzt's example.
Since I haven't got enough reputation to comment, I have to post yet another answer with a bit better code readability:
func AssertSameStringSlice(x, y []string) bool {
if len(x) != len(y) {
return false
}
itemAppearsTimes := make(map[string]int, len(x))
for _, i := range x {
itemAppearsTimes[i]++
}
for _, i := range y {
if _, ok := itemAppearsTimes[i]; !ok {
return false
}
itemAppearsTimes[i]--
if itemAppearsTimes[i] == 0 {
delete(itemAppearsTimes, i)
}
}
if len(itemAppearsTimes) == 0 {
return true
}
return false
}
The logic is the same as in this answer
I know its been answered but still I would like to add my answer. By following code here stretchr/testify we can have something like
func Elementsmatch(listA, listB []string) (string, bool) {
aLen := len(listA)
bLen := len(listB)
if aLen != bLen {
return fmt.Sprintf("Len of the lists don't match , len listA %v, len listB %v", aLen, bLen), false
}
visited := make([]bool, bLen)
for i := 0; i < aLen; i++ {
found := false
element := listA[i]
for j := 0; j < bLen; j++ {
if visited[j] {
continue
}
if element == listB[j] {
visited[j] = true
found = true
break
}
}
if !found {
return fmt.Sprintf("element %s appears more times in %s than in %s", element, listA, listB), false
}
}
return "", true
}
Now lets talk about performance of this solution compared to map based ones. Well it really depends on the size of the lists which you are comparing, If size of list is large (I would say greater than 20) then map approach is better else this would be sufficent.
Well on Go PlayGround it shows 0s always, but run this on local system and you can see the difference in time taken as size of list increases
So the solution I propose is, adding map based comparision from above solution
func Elementsmatch(listA, listB []string) (string, bool) {
aLen := len(listA)
bLen := len(listB)
if aLen != bLen {
return fmt.Sprintf("Len of the lists don't match , len listA %v, len listB %v", aLen, bLen), false
}
if aLen > 20 {
return elementsMatchByMap(listA, listB)
}else{
return elementsMatchByLoop(listA, listB)
}
}
func elementsMatchByLoop(listA, listB []string) (string, bool) {
aLen := len(listA)
bLen := len(listB)
visited := make([]bool, bLen)
for i := 0; i < aLen; i++ {
found := false
element := listA[i]
for j := 0; j < bLen; j++ {
if visited[j] {
continue
}
if element == listB[j] {
visited[j] = true
found = true
break
}
}
if !found {
return fmt.Sprintf("element %s appears more times in %s than in %s", element, listA, listB), false
}
}
return "", true
}
func elementsMatchByMap(x, y []string) (string, bool) {
// create a map of string -> int
diff := make(map[string]int, len(x))
for _, _x := range x {
// 0 value for int is 0, so just increment a counter for the string
diff[_x]++
}
for _, _y := range y {
// If the string _y is not in diff bail out early
if _, ok := diff[_y]; !ok {
return fmt.Sprintf(" %v is not present in list b", _y), false
}
diff[_y] -= 1
if diff[_y] == 0 {
delete(diff, _y)
}
}
if len(diff) == 0 {
return "", true
}
return "", false
}
Related
I want to read and split large text file (near 3GB) to blocks with n symbols length. I was trying to read file and split using runes, but it takes a lot of memory.
func SplitSubN(s string, n int) []string {
sub := ""
subs := []string{}
runes := bytes.Runes([]byte(s))
l := len(runes)
for i, r := range runes {
sub = sub + string(r)
if (i+1)%n == 0 {
subs = append(subs, sub)
sub = ""
} else if (i + 1) == l {
subs = append(subs, sub)
}
}
return subs
}
I suppose it can be done in smarter way, like a phased reading of blocks of a certain length from file, but I don't know how to do it correctly.
Scan for rune start bytes and split based on that. This eliminates all allocations within the function except for the allocation of the result slice.
func SplitSubN(s string, n int) []string {
if len(s) == 0 {
return nil
}
m := 0
i := 0
j := 1
var result []string
for ; j < len(s); j++ {
if utf8.RuneStart(s[j]) {
if (m+1)%n == 0 {
result = append(result, s[i:j])
i = j
}
m++
}
}
if j > i {
result = append(result, s[i:j])
}
return result
}
The API specified in the question requires that the application allocate memory when converting the []byte read from the file to a string. This allocation can be avoided by changing the function to work on bytes:
func SplitSubN(s []byte, n int) [][]byte {
if len(s) == 0 {
return nil
}
m := 0
i := 0
j := 1
var result [][]byte
for ; j < len(s); j++ {
if utf8.RuneStart(s[j]) {
if (m+1)%n == 0 {
result = append(result, s[i:j])
i = j
}
m++
}
}
if j > i {
result = append(result, s[i:j])
}
return result
}
Both of these functions require that the application slurp the entire file into memory. I assume that's OK because the function in the question does as well. If you only need to process one chunk at a time, then the above code be be adapted to scan as the file is read incrementally.
Actually, the most interesting part is not parsing chunk itself but rather handling characters overlapping.
For example, if you read from a file say in chunks of N bytes but last multi-byte char is read partially (the remainder will be read in the next iteration).
Here is a solution that reads a text file by given chunks and handles characters overlapping in async manner:
package main
import (
"fmt"
"io"
"log"
"os"
"unicode/utf8"
)
func main() {
data, err := ReadInChunks("testfile", 1024*16)
competed := false
for ; !competed; {
select {
case next := <-data:
if next == nil {
competed = true
break
}
fmt.Printf(string(next))
case e := <-err:
if e != nil {
log.Fatalf("error: %s", e)
}
}
}
}
func ReadInChunks(path string, readChunkSize int) (data chan []rune, err chan error) {
var readChanel = make(chan []rune)
var errorChanel = make(chan error)
onDone := func() {
close(readChanel)
close(errorChanel)
}
onError := func(err error) {
errorChanel <- err
onDone()
}
go func() {
if _, err := os.Stat(path); os.IsNotExist(err) {
onError(fmt.Errorf("file [%s] does not exist", path))
return
}
f, err := os.Open(path)
if err != nil {
onError(err)
return
}
defer f.Close()
readBuf := make([]byte, readChunkSize)
reminder := 0
for {
read, err := f.Read(readBuf[reminder:])
if err == io.EOF {
onDone()
return
}
if err != nil {
onError(err)
}
runes, parsed := runes(readBuf[:reminder+read])
if reminder = readChunkSize - parsed; reminder > 0 {
copy(readBuf[:reminder], readBuf[readChunkSize-reminder:])
}
if len(runes) > 0 {
readChanel <- runes
}
}
}()
return readChanel, errorChanel
}
func runes(nextBuffer []byte) ([]rune, int) {
t := make([]rune, utf8.RuneCount(nextBuffer))
i := 0
var size = len(nextBuffer)
var read = 0
for len(nextBuffer) > 0 {
r, l := utf8.DecodeRune(nextBuffer)
runeLen := utf8.RuneLen(r)
if read+runeLen > size {
break
}
read += runeLen
t[i] = r
i++
nextBuffer = nextBuffer[l:]
}
return t[:i], read
}
It can be greatly simplified if the file is ACSII.
Alternativly, if you need to support unicode you can play aroud UTF-32 (which has fixed length) or UTF-16 (if you don't need to handle >2-bytes, you can treat it as fixed-size as well)
Example:
a_array := {"1","2","3","4,"}
b_array := {"3","4"}
Desired result:
"1","2"
With the assumption, a_array elements definitely has b_array elements.
If you need to strictly compare one slice against the other you may do something along the lines of
func diff(a []string, b []string) []string {
// Turn b into a map
var m map[string]bool
m = make(map[string]bool, len(b))
for _, s := range b {
m[s] = false
}
// Append values from the longest slice that don't exist in the map
var diff []string
for _, s := range a {
if _, ok := m[s]; !ok {
diff = append(diff, s)
continue
}
m[s] = true
}
// Sort the resulting slice
sort.Strings(diff)
return diff
}
Go Playground
Alternatively if you want to get all values from both slices that are not present in both of them you can do
func diff(a []string, b []string) []string {
var shortest, longest *[]string
if len(a) < len(b) {
shortest = &a
longest = &b
} else {
shortest = &b
longest = &a
}
// Turn the shortest slice into a map
var m map[string]bool
m = make(map[string]bool, len(*shortest))
for _, s := range *shortest {
m[s] = false
}
// Append values from the longest slice that don't exist in the map
var diff []string
for _, s := range *longest {
if _, ok := m[s]; !ok {
diff = append(diff, s)
continue
}
m[s] = true
}
// Append values from map that were not in the longest slice
for s, ok := range m {
if ok {
continue
}
diff = append(diff, s)
}
// Sort the resulting slice
sort.Strings(diff)
return diff
}
Then
fmt.Println(diff(a_array, b_array))
will give you
[1 2]
Go playground
Next code in Golang to generate powerset produces wrong result on input {"A", "B", "C", "D", "E"}. I see [A B C E E] as the last generated set.
package main
import (
"fmt"
)
func main() {
for _, s := range PowerSet([]string{"A", "B", "C", "D", "E"}) {
fmt.Println(s)
}
}
func PowerSet(set []string) [][]string {
var powerSet [][]string
powerSet = append(powerSet, make([]string, 0))
for _, element := range set {
var moreSets [][]string
for _, existingSet := range powerSet {
newSet := append(existingSet, element)
moreSets = append(moreSets, newSet)
}
powerSet = append(powerSet, moreSets...)
}
return powerSet
}
How to fix it? How to write it idiomatically in Go?
The problem with your program is not the algorithm itself but this line:
newSet := append(existingSet, element)
You should not append and assign to a different variable.
As the documentation states (emphasis mine), "The append built-in function appends elements to the end of a slice. If it has sufficient capacity, the destination is resliced to accommodate the new elements. If it does not, a new underlying array will be allocated.".
So, there might be cases where newSet := append(existingSet, element) will actually modify existingSet itself, which would break your logic.
If you change that to instead create a new array and append to that one, it works as you expect it.
newSet := make([]string, 0)
newSet = append(newSet, existingSet...)
newSet = append(newSet, element)
For instance, you can use algorithm like this one: https://stackoverflow.com/a/2779467/3805062.
func PowerSet(original []string) [][]string {
powerSetSize := int(math.Pow(2, float64(len(original))))
result := make([][]string, 0, powerSetSize)
var index int
for index < powerSetSize {
var subSet []string
for j, elem := range original {
if index& (1 << uint(j)) > 0 {
subSet = append(subSet, elem)
}
}
result = append(result, subSet)
index++
}
return result
}
Elaborating on #eugenioy's answer.
Look at this thread. Here is a working example : https://play.golang.org/p/dzoTk1kimf
func copy_and_append_string(slice []string, elem string) []string {
// wrong: return append(slice, elem)
return append(append([]string(nil), slice...), elem)
}
func PowerSet(s []string) [][]string {
if s == nil {
return nil
}
r := [][]string{[]string{}}
for _, es := range s {
var u [][]string
for _, er := range r {
u = append(u, copy_and_append_string(er, es))
}
r = append(r, u...)
}
return r
}
I'm trying to write a function that returns the finds first character in a String that doesn't repeat, so far I have this:
package main
import (
"fmt"
"strings"
)
func check(s string) string {
ss := strings.Split(s, "")
smap := map[string]int{}
for i := 0; i < len(ss); i++ {
(smap[ss[i]])++
}
for k, v := range smap {
if v == 1 {
return k
}
}
return ""
}
func main() {
fmt.Println(check("nebuchadnezzer"))
}
Unfortunately in Go when you iterate a map there's no guarantee of the order so every time I run the code I get a different value, any pointers?
Using a map and 2 loops :
play
func check(s string) string {
m := make(map[rune]uint, len(s)) //preallocate the map size
for _, r := range s {
m[r]++
}
for _, r := range s {
if m[r] == 1 {
return string(r)
}
}
return ""
}
The benfit of this is using just 2 loops vs multiple loops if you're using strings.ContainsRune, strings.IndexRune (each function will have inner loops in them).
Efficient (in time and memory) algorithms for grabbing all or the first unique byte http://play.golang.org/p/ZGFepvEXFT:
func FirstUniqueByte(s string) (b byte, ok bool) {
occur := [256]byte{}
order := make([]byte, 0, 256)
for i := 0; i < len(s); i++ {
b = s[i]
switch occur[b] {
case 0:
occur[b] = 1
order = append(order, b)
case 1:
occur[b] = 2
}
}
for _, b = range order {
if occur[b] == 1 {
return b, true
}
}
return 0, false
}
As a bonus, the above function should never generate any garbage. Note that I changed your function signature to be a more idiomatic way to express what you're describing. If you need a func(string) string signature anyway, then the point is moot.
That can certainly be optimized, but one solution (which isn't using map) would be:
(playground example)
func check(s string) string {
unique := ""
for pos, c := range s {
if strings.ContainsRune(unique, c) {
unique = strings.Replace(unique, string(c), "", -1)
} else if strings.IndexRune(s, c) == pos {
unique = unique + string(c)
}
}
fmt.Println("All unique characters found: ", unique)
if len(unique) > 0 {
_, size := utf8.DecodeRuneInString(unique)
return unique[:size]
}
return ""
}
This is after the question "Find the first un-repeated character in a string"
krait suggested below that the function should:
return a string containing the first full rune, not just the first byte of the utf8 encoding of the first rune.
Here is my desired outcome
slice1 := []string{"foo", "bar","hello"}
slice2 := []string{"foo", "bar"}
difference(slice1, slice2)
=> ["hello"]
I am looking for the difference between the two string slices!
Assuming Go maps are ~O(1), here is an ~O(n) difference function that works on unsorted slices.
// difference returns the elements in `a` that aren't in `b`.
func difference(a, b []string) []string {
mb := make(map[string]struct{}, len(b))
for _, x := range b {
mb[x] = struct{}{}
}
var diff []string
for _, x := range a {
if _, found := mb[x]; !found {
diff = append(diff, x)
}
}
return diff
}
Depending on the size of the slices, different solutions might be best.
My answer assumes order doesn't matter.
Using simple loops, only to be used with smaller slices:
package main
import "fmt"
func difference(slice1 []string, slice2 []string) []string {
var diff []string
// Loop two times, first to find slice1 strings not in slice2,
// second loop to find slice2 strings not in slice1
for i := 0; i < 2; i++ {
for _, s1 := range slice1 {
found := false
for _, s2 := range slice2 {
if s1 == s2 {
found = true
break
}
}
// String not found. We add it to return slice
if !found {
diff = append(diff, s1)
}
}
// Swap the slices, only if it was the first loop
if i == 0 {
slice1, slice2 = slice2, slice1
}
}
return diff
}
func main() {
slice1 := []string{"foo", "bar", "hello"}
slice2 := []string{"foo", "world", "bar", "foo"}
fmt.Printf("%+v\n", difference(slice1, slice2))
}
Output:
[hello world]
Playground: http://play.golang.org/p/KHTmJcR4rg
I use the map to solve this problem
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
slice1 := []string{"foo", "bar","hello"}
slice2 := []string{"foo", "bar","world"}
diffStr := difference(slice1, slice2)
for _, diffVal := range diffStr {
fmt.Println(diffVal)
}
}
func difference(slice1 []string, slice2 []string) ([]string){
diffStr := []string{}
m :=map [string]int{}
for _, s1Val := range slice1 {
m[s1Val] = 1
}
for _, s2Val := range slice2 {
m[s2Val] = m[s2Val] + 1
}
for mKey, mVal := range m {
if mVal==1 {
diffStr = append(diffStr, mKey)
}
}
return diffStr
}
output:
hello
world
func diff(a, b []string) []string {
temp := map[string]int{}
for _, s := range a {
temp[s]++
}
for _, s := range b {
temp[s]--
}
var result []string
for s, v := range temp {
if v != 0 {
result = append(result, s)
}
}
return result
}
If you want to handle duplicated strings, the v in the map can do that. And you can pick a.Remove(b) ( v>0 ) or b.Remove(a) (v<0)
func unique(slice []string) []string {
encountered := map[string]int{}
diff := []string{}
for _, v := range slice {
encountered[v] = encountered[v]+1
}
for _, v := range slice {
if encountered[v] == 1 {
diff = append(diff, v)
}
}
return diff
}
func main() {
slice1 := []string{"hello", "michael", "dorner"}
slice2 := []string{"hello", "michael"}
slice3 := []string{}
fmt.Println(unique(append(slice1, slice2...))) // [dorner]
fmt.Println(unique(append(slice2, slice3...))) // [michael michael]
}
As mentioned by ANisus, different approaches will suit different sizes of input slices. This solution will work in linear time O(n) independent of input size, but assumes that the "equality" includes index position.
Thus, in the OP's examples of:
slice1 := []string{"foo", "bar","hello"}
slice2 := []string{"foo", "bar"}
The entries foo and bar are equal not just due to value, but also due to their index in the slice.
Given these conditions, you can do something like:
package main
import "fmt"
func difference(s1, s2 []string) string {
var (
lenMin int
longest []string
out string
)
// Determine the shortest length and the longest slice
if len(s1) < len(s2) {
lenMin = len(s1)
longest = s2
} else {
lenMin = len(s2)
longest = s1
}
// compare common indeces
for i := 0; i < lenMin; i++ {
if s1[i] != s2[i] {
out += fmt.Sprintf("=>\t%s\t%s\n", s1[i], s2[i])
}
}
// add indeces not in common
for _, v := range longest[lenMin:] {
out += fmt.Sprintf("=>\t%s\n", v)
}
return out
}
func main() {
slice1 := []string{"foo", "bar", "hello"}
slice2 := []string{"foo", "bar"}
fmt.Print(difference(slice1, slice2))
}
Produces:
=> hello
Playground
If you change the slices to be:
func main() {
slice1 := []string{"foo", "baz", "hello"}
slice2 := []string{"foo", "bar"}
fmt.Print(difference(slice1, slice2))
}
It will produce:
=> baz bar
=> hello
Most of the other solutions here will fail to return the correct answer in case the slices contain duplicated elements.
This solution is O(n) time and O(n) space if the slices are already sorted, and O(n*log(n)) time O(n) space if they are not, but has the nice property of actually being correct. 🤣
func diff(a, b []string) []string {
a = sortIfNeeded(a)
b = sortIfNeeded(b)
var d []string
i, j := 0, 0
for i < len(a) && j < len(b) {
c := strings.Compare(a[i], b[j])
if c == 0 {
i++
j++
} else if c < 0 {
d = append(d, a[i])
i++
} else {
d = append(d, b[j])
j++
}
}
d = append(d, a[i:len(a)]...)
d = append(d, b[j:len(b)]...)
return d
}
func sortIfNeeded(a []string) []string {
if sort.StringsAreSorted(a) {
return a
}
s := append(a[:0:0], a...)
sort.Strings(s)
return s
}
If you know for sure that the slices are already sorted, you can remove the calls to sortIfNeeded (the reason for the defensive slice copy in sortIfNeeded is because sorting is done in-place, so we would be modifying the slices that are passed to diff).
See https://play.golang.org/p/lH-5L0aL1qr for tests showing correctness in face of duplicated entries.
I have this example but it works only for the elements of the first array "not present" in the second array
with generics
type HandleDiff[T comparable] func(item1 T, item2 T) bool
func HandleDiffDefault[T comparable](val1 T, val2 T) bool {
return val1 == val2
}
func Diff[T comparable](items1 []T, items2 []T, callback HandleDiff[T]) []T {
acc := []T{}
for _, item1 := range items1 {
find := false
for _, item2 := range items2 {
if callback(item1, item2) {
find = true
break
}
}
if !find {
acc = append(acc, item1)
}
}
return acc
}
usage
diff := Diff(items1, items2, HandleDiffDefault[string])
Why not keep it simple and use labels?
// returns items unique to slice1
func difference(slice1, slice2 []string) []string {
var diff []string
outer:
for _, v1 := range slice1 {
for _, v2 := range slice2 {
if v1 == v2 {
continue outer
}
}
diff = append(diff, v1)
}
return diff
}
https://go.dev/play/p/H46zSpfocHp
I would add a small change to the solution by #peterwilliams97, so that we can ignore the order of the input.
func difference(a, b []string) []string {
// reorder the input,
// so that we can check the longer slice over the shorter one
longer, shorter := a, b
if len(b) > len(a) {
longer, shorter = b, a
}
mb := make(map[string]struct{}, len(shorter))
for _, x := range shorter {
mb[x] = struct{}{}
}
var diff []string
for _, x := range longer {
if _, found := mb[x]; !found {
diff = append(diff, x)
}
}
return diff
}
The code below gives the absolute difference between strings regardless of the order. Space complexity O(n) and Time complexity O(n).
// difference returns the elements in a that aren't in b
func difference(a, b string) string {
longest, shortest := longestString(&a, &b)
var builder strings.Builder
var mem = make(map[rune]bool)
for _, s := range longest {
mem[s] = true
}
for _, s := range shortest {
if _, ok := mem[s]; ok {
mem[s] = false
}
}
for k, v := range mem {
if v == true {
builder.WriteRune(k)
}
}
return builder.String()
}
func longestString(a *string, b *string) ([]rune, []rune) {
if len(*a) > len(*b) {
return []rune(*a), []rune(*b)
}
return []rune(*b), []rune(*a)
}