My question is that, I have 2 strings, say String1 & String2. Now I want to check whether these 2 strings contain same characters or not, irrespective of their sequence.
Suppose String1= "qwerty", String2= "qywter". Now these Strings contain same characters but are in different sequence. So is there any function that can be used to show that these strings contain same characters?? Can equals() method do that???
All help is appreciated.
char[] chars1 = string1.toCharArray();
char[] chars2 = string2.toCharArray();
Arrays.sort(chars1);
Arrays.sort(chars2);
return Arrays.equals(chars1, chars2);
It depends whether you actually want characters or you really want code points, and then it matters whether you want to count duplicates or not. Here's one solution:
public class a {
public static void main(String[] args) {
String s1 = "qwerty";
String s2= "qywter";
System.out.println(codePointSet(s1).equals(codePointSet(s2)));
}
public static Set<Integer> codePointSet(String s) {
Set<Integer> set = new TreeSet<Integer>();
for (int i = 0, cp; i < s.length(); i += Character.charCount(i)) {
cp = s.codePointAt(i);
set.add(cp);
}
return set;
}
}
You can use String.equals, albeit indirectly. First you need a helper method:
// given a String, sorts its chars and return it as another String
public static String sorted(String s) {
char[] arr = s.toCharArray();
Arrays.sort(arr);
return new String(arr);
}
Then you can have:
String s1 = "qwerty";
String s2 = "qywter";
System.out.println(sorted(s1)); // eqrtwy
System.out.println(sorted(s1).equals(sorted(s2))); // true
Note that this is not the most efficient algorithm -- it's O(N log N) time, and uses extraneous space -- but should work fine for short strings. For long strings, you'd want to go through each char (or Unicode code points) manually (instead of toCharArray()), and perhaps use the linear-time counting sort.
If you don't care about specific character counts matching (e.g. "xxxyyy" and "xy" has the same chars, albeit in different numbers), then you can use a set-like representation (java.util.BitSet).
// given a string, returns its used char set as a java.util.BitSet
public static BitSet usedChar(String s) {
BitSet bs = new BitSet();
for (int i = 0; i < s.length(); i++) {
bs.set(s.charAt(i));
}
return bs;
}
Then you can have:
System.out.println(
usedChar("xxxyyy").equals(usedChar("xy"))
); // true
System.out.println(
usedChar("xyz").equals(usedChar("abc"))
); // false
int[] f = new int[(int)char.MaxValue];
foreach (var c in string1) f[(int)c]++;
foreach (var c in string2) f[(int)c]--;
return f.Max() == 0 && f.Min() == 0;
This is preferable solution when string1.length() >> char.MaxValue and it has lower big O notation complexity.
EDIT this is actually C# code but you can easly achieve similar result in Java.
String.equals() won't work for your particular case. You will likely need to write your own method to equate strings in this way.
If you have a long string that you need to compare, and you don't need a guarantee of success, you can do something like this:
make sure the strings are the same length
for each image
add up all the characters (casted as ints)
add up squares of characters (again casted as ints)
compare the sums of squares and the sums
if they are the same, then the strings contain the same characters.
Actually I spent some time trying to figure out where this wouldn't work, but I can't think of one. My gut tells me I'm missing something here, or this is a good comparator for this case.
Two steps are require
Do xor of both strings and if xor is 0 then you are partially sure.
If xor is 0 then find the sum of ascii value of both strings and if ascii sum is same then
both strings are same.
Hope this helps
Related
Lets say i have "jfk" and "jfc". I want to iterate through both strings and find out if and where they differ. I am trying to see if the strings are anagrams. "new door" and "one word" are anagrams. If its not an anagram i want the code to tell me by how many characters the strings differ. The jfk and jfc differ by 1. "macd" and "mebc" differ by 2 and they cant be anagrams. If the two strings are different lengths then they can't be anagrams.
I tried iterating through the strings but that's when i got stuck. I have no idea how to iterate through both strings at the same time and find out how if they differ by certain characters or not. I only got as far as checking if both strings were the same length.
static void isAnagram(List <String> s1, List <String> s2) {
if (s1.length() != s2.length()) {
System.out.println("Not anagrams");
} else {
for(int i = 0; i < s1.length(); i++) {
for(int j = 0; j < s2.lenth(); j++) {//i know that iterating through both strings like this does not make sense but i am stuck.
}```
Convert the arrays to char arrays. Then sort the arrays alphabetically after that compare them character by character.
String str = "abc";
char[] chars = str.toCharArray();
you can use this to convert string to char array,next it will be very easy loop the char array by running a simple if condition and increment a variable which will tell the difference of words.
If you are allowed additional libraries, you should have a look at Google’s Guava, espacially at com.google.common.collect.Multiset<E> and it’s implementations. You can put the characters of each string into an Multiset<Character> (not a Multiset, that will not work, as E must be a reference type, no primitive). Both strings are anagrams if multiset1.equals(multiset2).
Of both for loops, it seems to me that you only need one of the loop and use the same counter for both strings?
I am having an array
int arr[]={1,$,2,3,$,$,4,5}
and want the output as
arr[]={1,2,3,4,5,$,$,$}
Can you please help me
My code is
public class ArrayTest
{
static void splitString(String str)
{
StringBuffer alpha = new StringBuffer(),
num = new StringBuffer(), special = new StringBuffer();
for (int i=0; i<str.length(); i++)
{
if (Character.isDigit(str.charAt(i)))
num.append(str.charAt(i));
else
special.append(str.charAt(i));
}
System.out.print(num);
System.out.print(special);
}
public static void main(String args[])
{
String str = "1,2,$,$,3,4";
splitString(str);
}
}
I am getting the O/P as 1234,,$,$,,
instead of 1,2,3,4,$,$
Sorting is not single activity. Sorting is actually ordering, and comparing.
You can use Java built-in sorting but your own comparator (piece of code that knows how to compare).
Your comparator, need to make sure that special sign is just bigger then any other value (and is equal to any other special sign). If neither compared value is special sign, do ordinary comparison.
Here is link to other question that explains how to do that:
How to use Comparator in Java to sort
From your output I can see that your function includes the commas in the sorting as well. You must remove the commas before sorting the String:
str = str.replaceAll(",", "");
This line of code will replace all commas with nothing, or in other words remove them. Now you can execupe your sorting algorithm and add the commas at the end:
String merge = num.toString() + special.toString();
String result = "";
for (int i = 0; i < merge.length(); ++i) {
result += merge.charAt(i) + ",";
}
This will put an additional comma at the end which you can remove very easily:
result = result.substring(0, result.length() - 1);
Now result holds the wanted result.
I have a set of elements of size about 100-200. Let a sample element be X.
Each of the elements is a set of strings (number of strings in such a set is between 1 and 4). X = {s1, s2, s3}
For a given input string (about 100 characters), say P, I want to test whether any of the X is present in the string.
X is present in P iff for all s belong to X, s is a substring of P.
The set of elements is available for pre-processing.
I want this to be as fast as possible within Java. Possible approaches which do not fit my requirements:
Checking whether all the strings s are substring of P seems like a costly operation
Because s can be any substring of P (not necessarily a word), I cannot use a hash of words
I cannot directly use regex as s1, s2, s3 can be present in any order and all of the strings need to be present as substring
Right now my approach is to construct a huge regex out of each X with all possible permutations of the order of strings. Because number of elements in X <= 4, this is still feasible. It would be great if somebody can point me to a better (faster/more elegant) approach for the same.
Please note that the set of elements is available for pre-processing and I want the solution in java.
You can use regex directly:
Pattern regex = Pattern.compile(
"^ # Anchor search to start of string\n" +
"(?=.*s1) # Check if string contains s1\n" +
"(?=.*s2) # Check if string contains s2\n" +
"(?=.*s3) # Check if string contains s3",
Pattern.DOTALL | Pattern.COMMENTS);
Matcher regexMatcher = regex.matcher(subjectString);
foundMatch = regexMatcher.find();
foundMatch is true if all three substrings are present in the string.
Note that you might need to escape your "needle strings" if they could contain regex metacharacters.
It sounds like you're prematurely optimising your code before you've actually discovered a particular approach is actually too slow.
The nice property about your set of strings is that the string must contain all elements of X as a substring -- meaning we can fail fast if we find one element of X that is not contained within P. This might turn out a better time saving approach than others, especially if the elements of X are typically longer than a few characters and contain no or only a few repeating characters. For instance, a regex engine need only check 20 characters in 100 length string when checking for the presence of a 5 length string with non-repeating characters (eg. coast). And since X has 100-200 elements you really, really want to fail fast if you can.
My suggestion would be to sort the strings in order of length and check for each string in turn, stopping early if one string is not found.
Looks like a perfect case for the Rabin–Karp algorithm:
Rabin–Karp is inferior for single pattern searching to Knuth–Morris–Pratt algorithm, Boyer–Moore string search algorithm and other faster single pattern string searching algorithms because of its slow worst case behavior. However, Rabin–Karp is an algorithm of choice for multiple pattern search.
When the preprocessing time doesn't matter, you could create a hash table which maps every one-letter, two-letter, three-letter etc. combination which occurs in at least one string to a list of strings in which it occurs.
The algorithm to index a string would look like that (untested):
HashMap<String, Set<String>> indexes = new HashMap<String, Set<String>>();
for (int pos = 0; pos < string.length(); pos++) {
for (int sublen=0; sublen < string.length-pos; sublen++) {
String substring = string.substr(pos, sublen);
Set<String> stringsForThisKey = indexes.get(substring);
if (stringsForThisKey == null) {
stringsForThisKey = new HashSet<String>();
indexes.put(substring, stringsForThisKey);
}
stringsForThisKey.add(string);
}
}
Indexing each string that way would be quadratic to the length of the string, but it only needs to be done once for each string.
But the result would be constant-speed access to the list of strings in which a specific string occurs.
You are probably looking for Aho-Corasick algorithm, which constructs an automata (trie-like) from the set of strings (dictionary), and try to match the input string to the dictionary using this automata.
You might want to consider using a "Suffix Tree" as well. I haven't used this code, but there is one described here
I have used proprietary implementations (that I no longer even have access to) and they are very fast.
One way is to generate every possible substring and add this to a set. This is pretty inefficient.
Instead you can create all the strings from any point to the end into a NavigableSet and search for the closest match. If the closest match starts with the string you are looking for, you have a substring match.
static class SubstringMatcher {
final NavigableSet<String> set = new TreeSet<String>();
SubstringMatcher(Set<String> strings) {
for (String string : strings) {
for (int i = 0; i < string.length(); i++)
set.add(string.substring(i));
}
// remove duplicates.
String last = "";
for (String string : set.toArray(new String[set.size()])) {
if (string.startsWith(last))
set.remove(last);
last = string;
}
}
public boolean findIn(String s) {
String s1 = set.ceiling(s);
return s1 != null && s1.startsWith(s);
}
}
public static void main(String... args) {
Set<String> strings = new HashSet<String>();
strings.add("hello");
strings.add("there");
strings.add("old");
strings.add("world");
SubstringMatcher sm = new SubstringMatcher(strings);
System.out.println(sm.set);
for (String s : "ell,he,ow,lol".split(","))
System.out.println(s + ": " + sm.findIn(s));
}
prints
[d, ello, ere, hello, here, ld, llo, lo, old, orld, re, rld, there, world]
ell: true
he: true
ow: false
lol: false
In Java is there a way to check the condition:
"Does this single character appear at all in string x"
without using a loop?
You can use string.indexOf('a').
If the char a is present in string :
it returns the the index of the first occurrence of the character in
the character sequence represented by this object, or -1 if the
character does not occur.
String.contains() which checks if the string contains a specified sequence of char values
String.indexOf() which returns the index within the string of the first occurence of the specified character or substring (there are 4 variations of this method)
I'm not sure what the original poster is asking exactly. Since indexOf(...) and contains(...) both probably use loops internally, perhaps he's looking to see if this is possible at all without a loop? I can think of two ways off hand, one would of course be recurrsion:
public boolean containsChar(String s, char search) {
if (s.length() == 0)
return false;
else
return s.charAt(0) == search || containsChar(s.substring(1), search);
}
The other is far less elegant, but completeness...:
/**
* Works for strings of up to 5 characters
*/
public boolean containsChar(String s, char search) {
if (s.length() > 5) throw IllegalArgumentException();
try {
if (s.charAt(0) == search) return true;
if (s.charAt(1) == search) return true;
if (s.charAt(2) == search) return true;
if (s.charAt(3) == search) return true;
if (s.charAt(4) == search) return true;
} catch (IndexOutOfBoundsException e) {
// this should never happen...
return false;
}
return false;
}
The number of lines grow as you need to support longer and longer strings of course. But there are no loops/recurrsions at all. You can even remove the length check if you're concerned that that length() uses a loop.
You can use 2 methods from the String class.
String.contains() which checks if the string contains a specified sequence of char values
String.indexOf() which returns the index within the string of the first occurence of the specified character or substring or returns -1 if the character is not found (there are 4 variations of this method)
Method 1:
String myString = "foobar";
if (myString.contains("x") {
// Do something.
}
Method 2:
String myString = "foobar";
if (myString.indexOf("x") >= 0 {
// Do something.
}
Links by: Zach Scrivena
String temp = "abcdefghi";
if(temp.indexOf("b")!=-1)
{
System.out.println("there is 'b' in temp string");
}
else
{
System.out.println("there is no 'b' in temp string");
}
If you need to check the same string often you can calculate the character occurrences up-front. This is an implementation that uses a bit array contained into a long array:
public class FastCharacterInStringChecker implements Serializable {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
private final long[] l = new long[1024]; // 65536 / 64 = 1024
public FastCharacterInStringChecker(final String string) {
for (final char c: string.toCharArray()) {
final int index = c >> 6;
final int value = c - (index << 6);
l[index] |= 1L << value;
}
}
public boolean contains(final char c) {
final int index = c >> 6; // c / 64
final int value = c - (index << 6); // c - (index * 64)
return (l[index] & (1L << value)) != 0;
}}
To check if something does not exist in a string, you at least need to look at each character in a string. So even if you don't explicitly use a loop, it'll have the same efficiency. That being said, you can try using str.contains(""+char).
Is the below what you were looking for?
int index = string.indexOf(character);
return index != -1;
Yes, using the indexOf() method on the string class. See the API documentation for this method
String.contains(String) or String.indexOf(String) - suggested
"abc".contains("Z"); // false - correct
"zzzz".contains("Z"); // false - correct
"Z".contains("Z"); // true - correct
"😀and😀".contains("😀"); // true - correct
"😀and😀".contains("😂"); // false - correct
"😀and😀".indexOf("😀"); // 0 - correct
"😀and😀".indexOf("😂"); // -1 - correct
String.indexOf(int) and carefully considered String.indexOf(char) with char to int widening
"😀and😀".indexOf("😀".charAt(0)); // 0 though incorrect usage has correct output due to portion of correct data
"😀and😀".indexOf("😂".charAt(0)); // 0 -- incorrect usage and ambiguous result
"😀and😀".indexOf("😂".codePointAt(0)); // -1 -- correct usage and correct output
The discussions around character is ambiguous in Java world
can the value of char or Character considered as single character?
No. In the context of unicode characters, char or Character can sometimes be part of a single character and should not be treated as a complete single character logically.
if not, what should be considered as single character (logically)?
Any system supporting character encodings for Unicode characters should consider unicode's codepoint as single character.
So Java should do that very clear & loud rather than exposing too much of internal implementation details to users.
String class is bad at abstraction (though it requires confusingly good amount of understanding of its encapsulations to understand the abstraction 😒😒😒 and hence an anti-pattern).
How is it different from general char usage?
char can be only be mapped to a character in Basic Multilingual Plane.
Only codePoint - int can cover the complete range of Unicode characters.
Why is this difference?
char is internally treated as 16-bit unsigned value and could not represent all the unicode characters using UTF-16 internal representation using only 2-bytes. Sometimes, values in a 16-bit range have to be combined with another 16-bit value to correctly define character.
Without getting too verbose, the usage of indexOf, charAt, length and such methods should be more explicit. Sincerely hoping Java will add new UnicodeString and UnicodeCharacter classes with clearly defined abstractions.
Reason to prefer contains and not indexOf(int)
Practically there are many code flows that treat a logical character as char in java.
In Unicode context, char is not sufficient
Though the indexOf takes in an int, char to int conversion masks this from the user and user might do something like str.indexOf(someotherstr.charAt(0))(unless the user is aware of the exact context)
So, treating everything as CharSequence (aka String) is better
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("😀and😀".indexOf("😀".charAt(0))); // 0 though incorrect usage has correct output due to portion of correct data
System.out.println("😀and😀".indexOf("😂".charAt(0))); // 0 -- incorrect usage and ambiguous result
System.out.println("😀and😀".indexOf("😂".codePointAt(0))); // -1 -- correct usage and correct output
System.out.println("😀and😀".contains("😀")); // true - correct
System.out.println("😀and😀".contains("😂")); // false - correct
}
Semantics
char can handle most of the practical use cases. Still its better to use codepoints within programming environment for future extensibility.
codepoint should handle nearly all of the technical use cases around encodings.
Still, Grapheme Clusters falls out of the scope of codepoint level of abstraction.
Storage layers can choose char interface if ints are too costly(doubled). Unless storage cost is the only metric, its still better to use codepoint. Also, its better to treat storage as byte and delegate semantics to business logic built around storage.
Semantics can be abstracted at multiple levels. codepoint should become lowest level of interface and other semantics can be built around codepoint in runtime environment.
package com;
public class _index {
public static void main(String[] args) {
String s1="be proud to be an indian";
char ch=s1.charAt(s1.indexOf('e'));
int count = 0;
for(int i=0;i<s1.length();i++) {
if(s1.charAt(i)=='e'){
System.out.println("number of E:=="+ch);
count++;
}
}
System.out.println("Total count of E:=="+count);
}
}
static String removeOccurences(String a, String b)
{
StringBuilder s2 = new StringBuilder(a);
for(int i=0;i<b.length();i++){
char ch = b.charAt(i);
System.out.println(ch+" first index"+a.indexOf(ch));
int lastind = a.lastIndexOf(ch);
for(int k=new String(s2).indexOf(ch);k > 0;k=new String(s2).indexOf(ch)){
if(s2.charAt(k) == ch){
s2.deleteCharAt(k);
System.out.println("val of s2 : "+s2.toString());
}
}
}
System.out.println(s1.toString());
return (s1.toString());
}
you can use this code. It will check the char is present or not. If it is present then the return value is >= 0 otherwise it's -1. Here I am printing alphabets that is not present in the input.
import java.util.Scanner;
public class Test {
public static void letters()
{
System.out.println("Enter input char");
Scanner sc = new Scanner(System.in);
String input = sc.next();
System.out.println("Output : ");
for (char alphabet = 'A'; alphabet <= 'Z'; alphabet++) {
if(input.toUpperCase().indexOf(alphabet) < 0)
System.out.print(alphabet + " ");
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
letters();
}
}
//Ouput Example
Enter input char
nandu
Output :
B C E F G H I J K L M O P Q R S T V W X Y Z
If you see the source code of indexOf in JAVA:
public int indexOf(int ch, int fromIndex) {
final int max = value.length;
if (fromIndex < 0) {
fromIndex = 0;
} else if (fromIndex >= max) {
// Note: fromIndex might be near -1>>>1.
return -1;
}
if (ch < Character.MIN_SUPPLEMENTARY_CODE_POINT) {
// handle most cases here (ch is a BMP code point or a
// negative value (invalid code point))
final char[] value = this.value;
for (int i = fromIndex; i < max; i++) {
if (value[i] == ch) {
return i;
}
}
return -1;
} else {
return indexOfSupplementary(ch, fromIndex);
}
}
you can see it uses a for loop for finding a character. Note that each indexOf you may use in your code, is equal to one loop.
So, it is unavoidable to use loop for a single character.
However, if you want to find a special string with more different forms, use useful libraries such as util.regex, it deploys stronger algorithm to match a character or a string pattern with Regular Expressions. For example to find an email in a string:
String regex = "^(.+)#(.+)$";
Pattern pattern = Pattern.compile(regex);
Matcher matcher = pattern.matcher(email);
If you don't like to use regex, just use a loop and charAt and try to cover all cases in one loop.
Be careful recursive methods has more overhead than loop, so it's not recommended.
how about one uses this ;
let text = "Hello world, welcome to the universe.";
let result = text.includes("world");
console.log(result) ....// true
the result will be a true or false
this always works for me
You won't be able to check if char appears at all in some string without atleast going over the string once using loop / recursion ( the built-in methods like indexOf also use a loop )
If the no. of times you look up if a char is in string x is more way more than the length of the string than I would recommend using a Set data structure as that would be more efficient than simply using indexOf
String s = "abc";
// Build a set so we can check if character exists in constant time O(1)
Set<Character> set = new HashSet<>();
int len = s.length();
for(int i = 0; i < len; i++) set.add(s.charAt(i));
// Now we can check without the need of a loop
// contains method of set doesn't use a loop unlike string's contains method
set.contains('a') // true
set.contains('z') // false
Using set you will be able to check if character exists in a string in constant time O(1) but you will also use additional memory ( Space complexity will be O(n) ).
Some ways to iterate through the characters of a string in Java are:
Using StringTokenizer?
Converting the String to a char[] and iterating over that.
What is the easiest/best/most correct way to iterate?
I use a for loop to iterate the string and use charAt() to get each character to examine it. Since the String is implemented with an array, the charAt() method is a constant time operation.
String s = "...stuff...";
for (int i = 0; i < s.length(); i++){
char c = s.charAt(i);
//Process char
}
That's what I would do. It seems the easiest to me.
As far as correctness goes, I don't believe that exists here. It is all based on your personal style.
Two options
for(int i = 0, n = s.length() ; i < n ; i++) {
char c = s.charAt(i);
}
or
for(char c : s.toCharArray()) {
// process c
}
The first is probably faster, then 2nd is probably more readable.
Note most of the other techniques described here break down if you're dealing with characters outside of the BMP (Unicode Basic Multilingual Plane), i.e. code points that are outside of the u0000-uFFFF range. This will only happen rarely, since the code points outside this are mostly assigned to dead languages. But there are some useful characters outside this, for example some code points used for mathematical notation, and some used to encode proper names in Chinese.
In that case your code will be:
String str = "....";
int offset = 0, strLen = str.length();
while (offset < strLen) {
int curChar = str.codePointAt(offset);
offset += Character.charCount(curChar);
// do something with curChar
}
The Character.charCount(int) method requires Java 5+.
Source: http://mindprod.com/jgloss/codepoint.html
In Java 8 we can solve it as:
String str = "xyz";
str.chars().forEachOrdered(i -> System.out.print((char)i));
str.codePoints().forEachOrdered(i -> System.out.print((char)i));
The method chars() returns an IntStream as mentioned in doc:
Returns a stream of int zero-extending the char values from this
sequence. Any char which maps to a surrogate code point is passed
through uninterpreted. If the sequence is mutated while the stream is
being read, the result is undefined.
The method codePoints() also returns an IntStream as per doc:
Returns a stream of code point values from this sequence. Any
surrogate pairs encountered in the sequence are combined as if by
Character.toCodePoint and the result is passed to the stream. Any
other code units, including ordinary BMP characters, unpaired
surrogates, and undefined code units, are zero-extended to int values
which are then passed to the stream.
How is char and code point different? As mentioned in this article:
Unicode 3.1 added supplementary characters, bringing the total number
of characters to more than the 2^16 = 65536 characters that can be
distinguished by a single 16-bit char. Therefore, a char value no
longer has a one-to-one mapping to the fundamental semantic unit in
Unicode. JDK 5 was updated to support the larger set of character
values. Instead of changing the definition of the char type, some of
the new supplementary characters are represented by a surrogate pair
of two char values. To reduce naming confusion, a code point will be
used to refer to the number that represents a particular Unicode
character, including supplementary ones.
Finally why forEachOrdered and not forEach ?
The behaviour of forEach is explicitly nondeterministic where as the forEachOrdered performs an action for each element of this stream, in the encounter order of the stream if the stream has a defined encounter order. So forEach does not guarantee that the order would be kept. Also check this question for more.
For difference between a character, a code point, a glyph and a grapheme check this question.
I agree that StringTokenizer is overkill here. Actually I tried out the suggestions above and took the time.
My test was fairly simple: create a StringBuilder with about a million characters, convert it to a String, and traverse each of them with charAt() / after converting to a char array / with a CharacterIterator a thousand times (of course making sure to do something on the string so the compiler can't optimize away the whole loop :-) ).
The result on my 2.6 GHz Powerbook (that's a mac :-) ) and JDK 1.5:
Test 1: charAt + String --> 3138msec
Test 2: String converted to array --> 9568msec
Test 3: StringBuilder charAt --> 3536msec
Test 4: CharacterIterator and String --> 12151msec
As the results are significantly different, the most straightforward way also seems to be the fastest one. Interestingly, charAt() of a StringBuilder seems to be slightly slower than the one of String.
BTW I suggest not to use CharacterIterator as I consider its abuse of the '\uFFFF' character as "end of iteration" a really awful hack. In big projects there's always two guys that use the same kind of hack for two different purposes and the code crashes really mysteriously.
Here's one of the tests:
int count = 1000;
...
System.out.println("Test 1: charAt + String");
long t = System.currentTimeMillis();
int sum=0;
for (int i=0; i<count; i++) {
int len = str.length();
for (int j=0; j<len; j++) {
if (str.charAt(j) == 'b')
sum = sum + 1;
}
}
t = System.currentTimeMillis()-t;
System.out.println("result: "+ sum + " after " + t + "msec");
There are some dedicated classes for this:
import java.text.*;
final CharacterIterator it = new StringCharacterIterator(s);
for(char c = it.first(); c != CharacterIterator.DONE; c = it.next()) {
// process c
...
}
If you have Guava on your classpath, the following is a pretty readable alternative. Guava even has a fairly sensible custom List implementation for this case, so this shouldn't be inefficient.
for(char c : Lists.charactersOf(yourString)) {
// Do whatever you want
}
UPDATE: As #Alex noted, with Java 8 there's also CharSequence#chars to use. Even the type is IntStream, so it can be mapped to chars like:
yourString.chars()
.mapToObj(c -> Character.valueOf((char) c))
.forEach(c -> System.out.println(c)); // Or whatever you want
If you need to iterate through the code points of a String (see this answer) a shorter / more readable way is to use the CharSequence#codePoints method added in Java 8:
for(int c : string.codePoints().toArray()){
...
}
or using the stream directly instead of a for loop:
string.codePoints().forEach(c -> ...);
There is also CharSequence#chars if you want a stream of the characters (although it is an IntStream, since there is no CharStream).
If you need performance, then you must test on your environment. No other way.
Here example code:
int tmp = 0;
String s = new String(new byte[64*1024]);
{
long st = System.nanoTime();
for(int i = 0, n = s.length(); i < n; i++) {
tmp += s.charAt(i);
}
st = System.nanoTime() - st;
System.out.println("1 " + st);
}
{
long st = System.nanoTime();
char[] ch = s.toCharArray();
for(int i = 0, n = ch.length; i < n; i++) {
tmp += ch[i];
}
st = System.nanoTime() - st;
System.out.println("2 " + st);
}
{
long st = System.nanoTime();
for(char c : s.toCharArray()) {
tmp += c;
}
st = System.nanoTime() - st;
System.out.println("3 " + st);
}
System.out.println("" + tmp);
On Java online I get:
1 10349420
2 526130
3 484200
0
On Android x86 API 17 I get:
1 9122107
2 13486911
3 12700778
0
I wouldn't use StringTokenizer as it is one of classes in the JDK that's legacy.
The javadoc says:
StringTokenizer is a legacy class that
is retained for compatibility reasons
although its use is discouraged in new
code. It is recommended that anyone
seeking this functionality use the
split method of String or the
java.util.regex package instead.
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
String myStr = "Hello";
String myStr2 = "World";
for (int i = 0; i < myStr.length(); i++) {
char result = myStr.charAt(i);
System.out.println(result);
}
for (int i = 0; i < myStr2.length(); i++) {
char result = myStr2.charAt(i);
System.out.print(result);
}
}
}
Output:
H
e
l
l
o
World
See The Java Tutorials: Strings.
public class StringDemo {
public static void main(String[] args) {
String palindrome = "Dot saw I was Tod";
int len = palindrome.length();
char[] tempCharArray = new char[len];
char[] charArray = new char[len];
// put original string in an array of chars
for (int i = 0; i < len; i++) {
tempCharArray[i] = palindrome.charAt(i);
}
// reverse array of chars
for (int j = 0; j < len; j++) {
charArray[j] = tempCharArray[len - 1 - j];
}
String reversePalindrome = new String(charArray);
System.out.println(reversePalindrome);
}
}
Put the length into int len and use for loop.
StringTokenizer is totally unsuited to the task of breaking a string into its individual characters. With String#split() you can do that easily by using a regex that matches nothing, e.g.:
String[] theChars = str.split("|");
But StringTokenizer doesn't use regexes, and there's no delimiter string you can specify that will match the nothing between characters. There is one cute little hack you can use to accomplish the same thing: use the string itself as the delimiter string (making every character in it a delimiter) and have it return the delimiters:
StringTokenizer st = new StringTokenizer(str, str, true);
However, I only mention these options for the purpose of dismissing them. Both techniques break the original string into one-character strings instead of char primitives, and both involve a great deal of overhead in the form of object creation and string manipulation. Compare that to calling charAt() in a for loop, which incurs virtually no overhead.
Elaborating on this answer and this answer.
Above answers point out the problem of many of the solutions here which don't iterate by code point value -- they would have trouble with any surrogate chars. The java docs also outline the issue here (see "Unicode Character Representations"). Anyhow, here's some code that uses some actual surrogate chars from the supplementary Unicode set, and converts them back to a String. Note that .toChars() returns an array of chars: if you're dealing with surrogates, you'll necessarily have two chars. This code should work for any Unicode character.
String supplementary = "Some Supplementary: 𠜎𠜱𠝹𠱓";
supplementary.codePoints().forEach(cp ->
System.out.print(new String(Character.toChars(cp))));
This Example Code will Help you out!
import java.util.Comparator;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.TreeMap;
public class Solution {
public static void main(String[] args) {
HashMap<String, Integer> map = new HashMap<String, Integer>();
map.put("a", 10);
map.put("b", 30);
map.put("c", 50);
map.put("d", 40);
map.put("e", 20);
System.out.println(map);
Map sortedMap = sortByValue(map);
System.out.println(sortedMap);
}
public static Map sortByValue(Map unsortedMap) {
Map sortedMap = new TreeMap(new ValueComparator(unsortedMap));
sortedMap.putAll(unsortedMap);
return sortedMap;
}
}
class ValueComparator implements Comparator {
Map map;
public ValueComparator(Map map) {
this.map = map;
}
public int compare(Object keyA, Object keyB) {
Comparable valueA = (Comparable) map.get(keyA);
Comparable valueB = (Comparable) map.get(keyB);
return valueB.compareTo(valueA);
}
}
So typically there are two ways to iterate through string in java which has already been answered by multiple people here in this thread, just adding my version of it
First is using
String s = sc.next() // assuming scanner class is defined above
for(int i=0; i<s.length(); i++){
s.charAt(i) // This being the first way and is a constant time operation will hardly add any overhead
}
char[] str = new char[10];
str = s.toCharArray() // this is another way of doing so and it takes O(n) amount of time for copying contents from your string class to the character array
If performance is at stake then I will recommend using the first one in constant time, if it is not then going with the second one makes your work easier considering the immutability with string classes in java.