Develop Reference

how to ignore IndexOutOfRangeException?

I need something like this:
string a = "12345"
if (a[5] == null) {
//skip error and continue the cycle
}
So the question is, how to ignore that type of error?

Make an additional length-check like:
if (a.Length >= 6 && a[5] == null) {}
but i think you mean something more like this:
if (a.Length >= 6 && a[5] == char.MinValue) {}
A char cannot be null. It can be '\0', which comes close to a "null".
Regards

c# - StartsWith, EndsWith and between them [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
How can I get a character in a string by index?
(2 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
string qwe = "ABCD";
if(qwe.StartsWith("A") && qwe.EndsWith("D"))
{
MessageBox.Show("Message");
}
What I need is to make also a decision for B and C but not StartsWith and EndsWith, it's really hard for me to explain but just like this:
if(qwe.Second("B"))
{
//Do anything
}
and
if(qwe.Third("C"))
{
//Do anything
}

You know that you can access characters via index(zero based)?
if(qwe.Length >= 2 && qwe[1] == 'B')
{
//Do anything
}
if(qwe.Length >= 3 && qwe[2] == 'C')
{
//Do anything
}

Compare multiple values in one condition [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Equality comparison between multiple variables
(14 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
Int32 int1, int2, int3 = 123;
Given the above variables, how can I test that all of my variables have the value 123 without creating a collection to perform some Any or something on?
What I've Tried
if(int1 == int2 == int3 == 123)
{
// Fantastic code here
}
EDIT
I must apologise, I haven't been clear enough in my question. I'm fully aware of the && operator, I was asking with regard to 'elegance', i.e. how can I avoid repeating the value I want to compare against.
In the same way I have assigned all 3 integer variables the same value in one hit, I'd like to now make the comparison. It's looking as though there is no way of doing this, so far. I think I'm asking the impossible, I'll have to stick to the basic syntax and keep it simple.

You can create an usefull extension function:
public static bool EqualsAll<T>(this T val, params T[] values)
{
return values.All(v => v.Equals(val));
}
call it like:
bool res = 123.EqualsAll(int1,int2,int3);

You could try something like this, using the logical and operator:
if(int1 == 123 &&
int2 == 123 &&
int3 == 123)
{
}

if(int1 == 123 && int2 == 123 && int3 == 123) { // Code }
What your trying to achieve isn't possible the way you do it.
You have to separate it with &.

if(int1 == something && int2 == something && int3 == 123)
{
// Fantastic code here
}
This is how you should do it using && operator. You can check multiple conditions using this.
UPDATE :
As far as checking multiple values at one go is concerned, you can try making an array out those values and just fire a simple LINQ statement like this to check all of them for a particular value :
if (new[] { int1, int2, int3 }.All(x => x == 1))
Dont know if this fits into your requirement, just a suggestion though.

Handling (2 raise to n) -1 conditions

I have one logical question. I have collection of employee objects
There are 3 filter criteria conditions which have handle
For e.g. Employee name, Office name, salary.
Now these filter criteria should match like (Employee name AND/OR Office name AND/OR salary)
So here I have to write (2 raise n) -1 if conditions to handle this situation.
Is there any other way we can do this.
For (Employee name AND/OR Office name) condition I m doing following
if (criteria.EmpName != "" && criteria.OfficeName != "")
{
if (emp.EmpName == criteria.EmpName && emp.OfficeName == criteria.OfficeName)
{
bIsMatch = true;
}
}
else
{
if (criteria.EmpName != "" && emp.EmpName == criteria.EmpName)
bIsMatch = true;
else if (criteria.OfficeName != "" && emp.OfficeName == criteria.OfficeName)
bIsMatch = true;
}
Now if have to handle saraly also i have write min 5 conditions.
Is thr other way to do it?

There are lots of ways to do it, but since you didn't specify one specific language and since I don't feel qualified to judge your coding style, here's one that keeps the general form of your code, while demonstrating some better logic:
bool bIsMatch = true;
if (criteria.EmpName != "" && criteria.EmpName != emp.EmpName) {
bIsMatch = false;
} else if (criteria.OfficeName != "" && criteria.OffIceName != emp.OfficeName) {
bIsMatch = false;
} /* Repeat for as many conditions as there are */
if (bIsMatch) {
/* None of the checks above failed */
}

You can pair up your filtering conditions and have a single statement that encodes all the parameters:
if( (criteria.EmpName.equals("") || criteria.EmpName.equals(emp.EmpName))
&& (criteria.OfficeName.equals("") || criteria.OfficeName.equals(emp.OfficeName))
&& (criteria.Salary.equals("") || criteria.Salary.equals(emp.Salary)))
In each of the AND-ed expressions checks first if the filter is empty, if it is that piece will result in true, if it's not, then the check is performed against the corresponding value in emp and is true only when that check is true.

Start out by assuming you have a match and Then apply each criterion one by one.
bIsMatch = true;
if (bIsMatch && criteria.EmpName != "") bIsMatch = emp.EmpName == criteria.EmpName;
if (bIsMatch && criteria.OfficeName != "") bIsMatch = emp.OfficeName == criteria.OfficeName;
// ...
Or, write a helper function that does the matching.
bool IsMatch(String criterion, String value)
{
return criterion == "" || criterion == value;
}
Then you can do everything in one big if statement:
if (IsMatch(criteria.EmpName, emp.EmpName) &&
IsMatch(criteria.OfficeName, emp.OfficeName) &&
...
)

You can check the criteria individually and maintain a count of matches. That way you need only n conditions:
int matches = 0;
if (criteria.EmpName != "" && emp.EmpName == criteria.EmpName)
matches++;
// similar code for other criteria
if (matches >= 2) { // as many matches as required
// succeeded
}

How about this? The idea scales well for more filters, except that the mapping itself is convention based (name - name).
var map = new Dictionary<string, string>
{
{ criteria.EmpName, emp.EmpName },
{ criteria.OfficeName, emp.OfficeName},
{ criteria.ThirdProp, emp.ThirdProp }
};
bIsMatch = dict.All(kvp => string.IsNullOrEmpty(kvp.Key) || kvp.Key == kvp.Value);
I would question the overall design though; there's something that doesn't seem right about it. How would you deal with the Salary field that you mention? Surely, that's not a string? What's the sentinel-value being used in that case?

Make sure you are clear enough about the business logic before writing the code. According to your code, I can see that you want to check if emp and criteria have the same EmployeeName and OfficeName, any of the properties is considered to be the same if it's string.Empty. The code will be quite clear after yourself is clear. Here we go:
public static bool EmptyOrEquals(this string one, string another)
{
return string.IsNullOrEmpty(another) || one.Equals(another);
}
bIsMatch = emp.EmpName.EmptyOrEquals(criteria.EmpName)
&& emp.OfficeName.EmptyOrEquals(criteria.OfficeName);

Test each question individually and use a bit set to encode the combinations of answers.
This results in cleaner code because you only test each criteria once, it's compact yet readable, and yet you can easily plug in code to handle each combination. And it's the fast too. O(n) to test all the criteria and O(1) to find the actual combination.
For a small, fixed number of criteria, you can push bits around manually. For many criteria, or for a solution that scales, use java.util.BitSet
Bit pushing example:
int bits = 0;
if (...criteria 1...) {
bits = 1;
}
if (...criteria 2...) {
bits |= 2;
}
if (...bits 3...) {
bits |= 4;
}
switch (bits) {
case 0: // no criteria matched
;
case 1: // criteria 1 matched
;
case 2: // criteria 2 matched
;
case 3: // criteria 1 AND 2 matched
;
case 4: // criteria 3 matched
;
case 5: // criteria 1 AND 3 matched
;
case 6: // criteria 2 AND 3 matched
;
case 7: // criteria 1 AND 2 AND 3 matched
;
}
You can generalize this solution using java.util.BitSet to manipulate bits for n criteria (useful when n > 64!). To facilitate quick look up, store the hash of each BitSet combination in a map that maps the hash code to a command class.

How to check if two string are of the same length?

I want to check if two string are of the same length. I tried the following, but it doesn't work.
string passnew = "1233";
string passcnfrm = "1234";
if((passnew.Length&&passcnfrm.Length)>6 ||(passnew.Length&&passcnfrm.Length)<15)
{
// ...
}
Why does it not work? What do I need to change?

if(passnew.Length == passcnfrm.Length &&
passnew.Length > 6 && passnew.Length < 15)
{
// do stuff
}

You are missing some basic syntax lessons. What you write inside of these brackets are conditions. We have unary operators (operating on one thing), binary operators (two) and one tertiary operator (forget about that one).
You cannot construct something like your "boundary test" with those easily.
A possible way:
(passnew.Length > 6) && (passcnfrm.Length > 6)
But you aren't testing if the length is equal anyway, even if you could use a syntax like that. You seem to want to compare if both are longer than 6 chars and shorter than 15 chars. One at 7 and one at 14 would satisfy both conditions..

if(passnew.Length == passcnfrm.Length &&
(passnew.Length < 15 && passnew.Length > 6))
{
// ...
}
Checks both are same length, and either one is more than 6 and less than 15 characters long.

that would be:
if(passcnfrm.Length.Equals(passnew.Length))
{
//do stuff
}

A probably better way to do it is:
if (( passnew != null && passcnfrm != null )
( passnew == passcnfrm )
&& ( passnew.Length > 6 && passnew.Length < 15 ))
{
// do stuff
}
Hides the length check inside the equality check which you'll probably need, it isn't in your question but the variable names make it pretty clear you're doing a password change function there. I added the null check to make sure the length checks don't throw a NullReferenceException, not needed in the example because you assign both manually, but might save some trouble if you're going to convert this to a method later on.

You can use like this:
if (s.Contains(s1[i]))
or:
boolean equalsIgnoreCase(String anotherString);
or use this method:
public static int occurrence(string [] a, string a2)
{
int occ = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < a.Length;i++ )
{
if(a[i].Equals(a2))
{
occ++;
}
}
return occ;
}