I am trying to read in a file which is essentially a list of integers, seperated by a line. Obviously, file input can never be trusted so I need to filter out non-integers.
1
2
3
4
I know the as operator usually converts if it can and then assigns a null, however because int isn't nullable this isn't the case. I thought that perhaps I could cast to Nullable<int>. I have never really delved into this, I thought perhaps I could do:
var lines = File.ReadAllLines("");
var numbers = lines.Select(line => line as int?).Where(i => i != null);
I know that I could get potentially get around this by doing:
var numbers = lines.Select(line =>
{
int iReturn = 0;
if (int.TryParse(line, out iReturn ))
return iReturn;
else
return null;
}).Where(i => i != null);
I also could potentially do it as an extension method.
I was just looking for a neat, concise way of doing the cast in a statement and also understanding why my code is invalid.
I'm always using this simple extension method:
public static int? TryGetInt(this string item)
{
int i;
bool success = int.TryParse(item, out i);
return success ? (int?)i : (int?)null;
}
Then it's easy:
var numbers = lines.Select(line => line.TryGetInt())
.Where(i => i.HasValue)
.Select(i => i.Value);
You can also use int.TryParse without the extension, but that is undocumented hence might stop working in future:
int i = 0;
var numbers = lines.Where(line => int.TryParse(line, out i))
.Select(line => i);
Edit
"also understanding why my code is invalid"
relevant code:
if (int.TryParse(line, out iReturn ))
return iReturn;
else
return null;
It would work if you'd replace
else
return null;
with
else
return (int?)null;
because you are returning an int, but null is not convertible implicitly to an int.
There isn't a concise way to do this because here you don't need to cast (you cannot cast) -- you need to convert from one type to another. The types of course are int and string (so not exactly "any" types), but as in the general case any conversion between unrelated types cannot be done "just like that".
Nope. C# is deliberately cautious about changing strings to numbers.
You can make your code shorter (no more nulls) using a foreach loop
var numbers = new List<int>();
foreach(string line in lines)
{
int n;
if (int.TryParse(line, out n))
numbers.Add(n);
}
If I understand you correctly and you want just filter the non integer lines, maybe regex is an option?
var lines = File.ReadAllLines("");
var numbers = lines.Where(i => Regex.IsMatch(i, "[0-9]+"));
Here's the best I came up with:
Use this extension method:
public static class Int32Extensions
{
public static int? ParseOrDefault(this string text)
{
int iReturn = 0;
if (int.TryParse(text, out iReturn))
{
return iReturn;
}
return null;
}
}
Like this:
var query = lines.Select(x => x.ParseOrDefault()).Where(x => x.HasValue);
You can create and extension method
public static int? ToInt(this string s, int default){ ... }
and use it in LINQ:
var lines = File.ReadAllLines(path);
var numbers = lines.Select(line => line.ToInt())
.Where(i => i != null);
Related
Is there a way to achieve this?
I tried:
string str = "{34.10,0,0.00}"; //the string as I get it from Postgres DB
decimal[] won;
won = (decimal[])(str); //Cannot convert type 'string' to 'decimal[]'
What I would ideally want is to get into won:
won[0] = 34.10
won[1] = 0
won[2] = 0.00
Surely, I can go and split by commas, and put it in the array but I'm wondering if there's a better way.
You have to Split
won = str.Trim('{', '}').Split(',').Select(decimal.Parse).ToArray();
Edit: This part is just for fun
There is no way to cast string to a decimal[] array directly, but if you want you can add a decimal wrapper class and define implicit conversions:
class MyDecimal
{
private decimal[] _values;
public MyDecimal(int size)
{
_values = new decimal[size];
}
public decimal this[int index]
{
get { return _values[index]; }
set { _values[index] = value; }
}
public static implicit operator MyDecimal(string str)
{
var numbers = str.Trim('{', '}').Split(',');
MyDecimal d = new MyDecimal(numbers.Length);
d._values = numbers
.Select(x => decimal.Parse(x,CultureInfo.InvariantCulture))
.ToArray();
return d;
}
public static implicit operator string(MyDecimal md)
{
return string.Join(",", md._values);
}
}
Then you can do:
string str = "{34.10,0,0.00}"; //the string as I get it from Postgres DB
MyDecimal won = str;
I first misread your question. The real answer is: I know of no other way than splitting and converting in loops or using LINQ (for a LINQ sample see Selman22's answer). There's no way to cast a string to an array in one go.
While it is essentially what you suggest, you could try this:
// Remove leading and trailing brackets
string s = str.Trim('{', '}');
// Split numbers
string[] parts = s.Split(',');
decimal[] nums = new decimal[parts.Length];
// Convert
for (int i = 0; i < parts.Length; i++)
nums[i] = Convert.ToDecimal(parts[i]);
Just to play devil's advocate to those who say you have no option but to split:
var result = new JavaScriptSerializer()
.Deserialize<decimal[]>(str.Replace('{', '[').Replace('}', ']'))
here is another but probably not a better way in regex
string str = "{34.10,0,0.00}";
string pattern = #"([\d]+[\.]|[\d]?)[\d]+";
decimal[] result = Regex.Matches(str, pattern, RegexOptions.None)
.Cast<Match>()
.Select(x => decimal.Parse(x.Value))
.ToArray();
but remember Jamie Zawinski:
Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use regular expressions." Now they have two problems.
Another way would be using a StringReader and managing the split
There is no better way. At least until C# is backed up by an AI which will just guess what you are trying to do by casting one datatype into another by a custom logic.
Any programmer would guess what you want. Until now though the C# compiler is no wizard.
I need to convert a string of comma separated integers into a list of integers.
What is the best way to do this?
I can do it below but am worried about the performance - Is there a better more efficient way to do this?
public IEnumerable<int> GetListOfIds()
{
string Ids = "1,4,5,7,12"; // would be passed into method
List<int> _result = Ids.Split(',')
.ToList()
.Select(item => int.Parse(item))
.ToList();
return _result;
}
There's no need to call ToList, but otherwise your code looks fine:
public IEnumerable<int> GetListOfIds(string ids)
{
return ids.Split(',').Select(item => int.Parse(item));
}
You may also want to consider adding error handling in case the input string is invalid:
public IEnumerable<int> GetListOfIds(string ids)
{
foreach (string part in ids.Split(','))
{
int x;
if (!int.TryParse(part, out x))
{
throw new ArgumentException(
string.Format("The value {0} cannot be parsed as an integer.", part),
"ids");
}
else
{
yield return x;
}
}
}
You may at least omit first ToList() statement - so it will be
List<int> _result = Ids.Split(',').Select(item => int.Parse(item)).ToList();
You can probably loop on the split result and do a yield return int.Parse... but I would not expect big differences unless you have really many items in the original string.
Use the Stringify.Library nuget package
Example 1 (Default delimiter is implicitly taken as comma)
var ids = "1, 4, 5, 7, 12";
var splitComma = new StringConverter().ConvertTo<List<int>>(ids);
Example 2 (Specifying the delimiter explicitly)
var ids = "1; 4; 5; 7; 12";
var splitColon = new StringConverter().ConvertTo<List<int>>(ids, new ConverterOptions { Delimiter = ';' });
If I have for example the following string:
"123;3344;4334;12"
and I want these numbers in a generic List<int>, I guess I don't know of a good way here other than to split in a loop and do a conversion then add to a List<int> through each iteration. Does anyone have other ways to go about this?
Updated. Here's what I came up with. I want to do this the old fashion way, not with LINQ because I'm trying to get better with just strings, arrays, lists and manipulating and converting in general.
public List<int> StringToList(string stringToSplit, char splitDelimiter)
{
List<int> list = new List<int>();
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(stringToSplit))
return list;
string[] values = stringToSplit.Split(splitDelimiter);
if (values.Length <= 1)
return list;
foreach (string s in values)
{
int i;
if (Int32.TryParse(s, out i))
list.Add(i);
}
return list;
}
This is a new string utility method I plan on using whenever I need to convert a delimited string list to List
So I'm returning an empty list back to the caller if something fails. Good/Bad? is it pretty common to do this?
Yes, there are more "elegant" ways to do this with LINQ but I want to do it manually..the old way for now just for my own understanding.
Also, what bothers me about this:
list.AddRange(str.Split(';').Select(Int32.Parse));
is that I have no idea:
How to shove in a TryParse there instead.
What if the str.Split(';').Select(Int32.Parse) just fails for whatever reason...then the method that this AddRange resides in is going to blow up and unless I add a try/catch around this whole thing, I'm screwed if I don't handle it properly.
static int? ToInt32OrNull(string s)
{
int value;
return (Int32.TryParse(s, out value)) ? value : default(int?);
}
// ...
var str = "123;3344;4334;12";
var list = new List<int>();
list.AddRange(str.Split(';')
.Select(ToInt32OrNull)
.Where(i => i != null)
.Cast<int>());
Questioner notes:
I don't know of a good way here other than to split in a loop and do a conversion then add to a List
In general, this is a major reason why LINQ was brought into C# - to remove the need to work with sequences of values by implementing loops, and instead just declare your intention to transform the sequence. If you ever find yourself thinking "I don't know how to do this except with a loop" - it's time to look into a LINQ construct which will do the work for you.
Performance Update:
Performance of LINQ has been quesioned below. While in the comments the idea of LINQ being slower is defended since we gain the benefits of readability, maintainability and composibility, there is another aspect which gives LINQ an easy performance advantage: parallelism. Here is an example where adding just one extension method call, AsParallel() doubles the performance. This is a great example of where scale-out beats micro-optimization without even needing to measure very carefully. Note I'm not claiming that micro-optimizations are not ever needed, but with the tools we have available at this level of absraction, the need becomes vanishingly small.
class Program
{
private const int ElementCount = 10000000;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var str = generateString();
var stopwatch = new Stopwatch();
var list1 = new List<int>(ElementCount);
var list2 = new List<int>(ElementCount);
var split = str.Split(';');
stopwatch.Start();
list1.AddRange(split
.Select(ToInt32OrNull)
.Where(i => i != null)
.Cast<int>());
stopwatch.Stop();
TimeSpan nonParallel = stopwatch.Elapsed;
stopwatch.Restart();
list2.AddRange(split
.AsParallel()
.Select(ToInt32OrNull)
.Where(i => i != null)
.Cast<int>());
stopwatch.Stop();
TimeSpan parallel = stopwatch.Elapsed;
Debug.WriteLine("Non-parallel: {0}", nonParallel);
Debug.WriteLine("Parallel: {0}", parallel);
}
private static String generateString()
{
var builder = new StringBuilder(1048576);
var rnd = new Random();
for (int i = 0; i < ElementCount; i++)
{
builder.Append(rnd.Next(99999));
builder.Append(';');
}
builder.Length--;
return builder.ToString();
}
static int? ToInt32OrNull(string s)
{
int value;
return (Int32.TryParse(s, out value)) ? value : default(int?);
}
}
Non-parallel: 00:00:07.0719911
Parallel: 00:00:04.5933906
string str = "123;3344;4334;12";
List<int> list = new List<int>();
foreach (string s in str.Split(';'))
{
list.Add( Int32.Parse(s));
}
List<int> list = (from numString in "123;3344;4334;12".Split(';')
select int.Parse(numString)).ToList();
string myString = "123;3344;4334;12";
var ints = new List<int>();
(from s in myString.Split(';')
select int.Parse()).ToList().ForEach(i=>ints.Add(i));
I've heard .Net 4.0 may have added ForEach to Enumerable<T>, so the ToList might be unnecessary there (can't test).
I think this is simplest
var str = "123;3344;4334;12";
var list = str.Split(';').ToList().Cast<int>();
In C#, I have an array of ints, containing digits only. I want to convert this array to string.
Array example:
int[] arr = {0,1,2,3,0,1};
How can I convert this to a string formatted as: "012301"?
at.net 3.5 use:
String.Join("", new List<int>(array).ConvertAll(i => i.ToString()).ToArray());
at.net 4.0 or above use: (see #Jan Remunda's answer)
string result = string.Join("", array);
You can simply use String.Join function, and as separator use string.Empty because it uses StringBuilder internally.
string result = string.Join(string.Empty, new []{0,1,2,3,0,1});
E.g.: If you use semicolon as separator, the result would be 0;1;2;3;0;1.
It actually works with null separator, and second parameter can be enumerable of any objects, like:
string result = string.Join(null, new object[]{0,1,2,3,0,"A",DateTime.Now});
I realize my opinion is probably not the popular one, but I guess I have a hard time jumping on the Linq-y band wagon. It's nifty. It's condensed. I get that and I'm not opposed to using it where it's appropriate. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like people have stopped thinking about creating utility functions to accomplish what they want and instead prefer to litter their code with (sometimes) excessively long lines of Linq code for the sake of creating a dense 1-liner.
I'm not saying that any of the Linq answers that people have provided here are bad, but I guess I feel like there is the potential that these single lines of code can start to grow longer and more obscure as you need to handle various situations. What if your array is null? What if you want a delimited string instead of just purely concatenated? What if some of the integers in your array are double-digit and you want to pad each value with leading zeros so that the string for each element is the same length as the rest?
Taking one of the provided answers as an example:
result = arr.Aggregate(string.Empty, (s, i) => s + i.ToString());
If I need to worry about the array being null, now it becomes this:
result = (arr == null) ? null : arr.Aggregate(string.Empty, (s, i) => s + i.ToString());
If I want a comma-delimited string, now it becomes this:
result = (arr == null) ? null : arr.Skip(1).Aggregate(arr[0].ToString(), (s, i) => s + "," + i.ToString());
This is still not too bad, but I think it's not obvious at a glance what this line of code is doing.
Of course, there's nothing stopping you from throwing this line of code into your own utility function so that you don't have that long mess mixed in with your application logic, especially if you're doing it in multiple places:
public static string ToStringLinqy<T>(this T[] array, string delimiter)
{
// edit: let's replace this with a "better" version using a StringBuilder
//return (array == null) ? null : (array.Length == 0) ? string.Empty : array.Skip(1).Aggregate(array[0].ToString(), (s, i) => s + "," + i.ToString());
return (array == null) ? null : (array.Length == 0) ? string.Empty : array.Skip(1).Aggregate(new StringBuilder(array[0].ToString()), (s, i) => s.Append(delimiter).Append(i), s => s.ToString());
}
But if you're going to put it into a utility function anyway, do you really need it to be condensed down into a 1-liner? In that case why not throw in a few extra lines for clarity and take advantage of a StringBuilder so that you're not doing repeated concatenation operations:
public static string ToStringNonLinqy<T>(this T[] array, string delimiter)
{
if (array != null)
{
// edit: replaced my previous implementation to use StringBuilder
if (array.Length > 0)
{
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
builder.Append(array[0]);
for (int i = 1; i < array.Length; i++)
{
builder.Append(delimiter);
builder.Append(array[i]);
}
return builder.ToString()
}
else
{
return string.Empty;
}
}
else
{
return null;
}
}
And if you're really so concerned about performance, you could even turn it into a hybrid function that decides whether to do string.Join or to use a StringBuilder depending on how many elements are in the array (this is a micro-optimization, not worth doing in my opinion and possibly more harmful than beneficial, but I'm using it as an example for this problem):
public static string ToString<T>(this T[] array, string delimiter)
{
if (array != null)
{
// determine if the length of the array is greater than the performance threshold for using a stringbuilder
// 10 is just an arbitrary threshold value I've chosen
if (array.Length < 10)
{
// assumption is that for arrays of less than 10 elements
// this code would be more efficient than a StringBuilder.
// Note: this is a crazy/pointless micro-optimization. Don't do this.
string[] values = new string[array.Length];
for (int i = 0; i < values.Length; i++)
values[i] = array[i].ToString();
return string.Join(delimiter, values);
}
else
{
// for arrays of length 10 or longer, use a StringBuilder
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
sb.Append(array[0]);
for (int i = 1; i < array.Length; i++)
{
sb.Append(delimiter);
sb.Append(array[i]);
}
return sb.ToString();
}
}
else
{
return null;
}
}
For this example, the performance impact is probably not worth caring about, but the point is that if you are in a situation where you actually do need to be concerned with the performance of your operations, whatever they are, then it will most likely be easier and more readable to handle that within a utility function than using a complex Linq expression.
That utility function still looks kind of clunky. Now let's ditch the hybrid stuff and do this:
// convert an enumeration of one type into an enumeration of another type
public static IEnumerable<TOut> Convert<TIn, TOut>(this IEnumerable<TIn> input, Func<TIn, TOut> conversion)
{
foreach (TIn value in input)
{
yield return conversion(value);
}
}
// concatenate the strings in an enumeration separated by the specified delimiter
public static string Delimit<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input, string delimiter)
{
IEnumerator<T> enumerator = input.GetEnumerator();
if (enumerator.MoveNext())
{
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
// start off with the first element
builder.Append(enumerator.Current);
// append the remaining elements separated by the delimiter
while (enumerator.MoveNext())
{
builder.Append(delimiter);
builder.Append(enumerator.Current);
}
return builder.ToString();
}
else
{
return string.Empty;
}
}
// concatenate all elements
public static string ToString<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input)
{
return ToString(input, string.Empty);
}
// concatenate all elements separated by a delimiter
public static string ToString<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input, string delimiter)
{
return input.Delimit(delimiter);
}
// concatenate all elements, each one left-padded to a minimum length
public static string ToString<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input, int minLength, char paddingChar)
{
return input.Convert(i => i.ToString().PadLeft(minLength, paddingChar)).Delimit(string.Empty);
}
Now we have separate and fairly compact utility functions, each of which are arguable useful on their own.
Ultimately, my point is not that you shouldn't use Linq, but rather just to say don't forget about the benefits of creating your own utility functions, even if they are small and perhaps only contain a single line that returns the result from a line of Linq code. If nothing else, you'll be able to keep your application code even more condensed than you could achieve with a line of Linq code, and if you are using it in multiple places, then using a utility function makes it easier to adjust your output in case you need to change it later.
For this problem, I'd rather just write something like this in my application code:
int[] arr = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 0, 1 };
// 012301
result = arr.ToString<int>();
// comma-separated values
// 0,1,2,3,0,1
result = arr.ToString(",");
// left-padded to 2 digits
// 000102030001
result = arr.ToString(2, '0');
To avoid the creation of an extra array you could do the following.
var builder = new StringBuilder();
Array.ForEach(arr, x => builder.Append(x));
var res = builder.ToString();
string result = arr.Aggregate("", (s, i) => s + i.ToString());
(Disclaimer: If you have a lot of digits (hundreds, at least) and you care about performance, I suggest eschewing this method and using a StringBuilder, as in JaredPar's answer.)
You can do:
int[] arr = {0,1,2,3,0,1};
string results = string.Join("",arr.Select(i => i.ToString()).ToArray());
That gives you your results.
I like using StringBuilder with Aggregate(). The "trick" is that Append() returns the StringBuilder instance itself:
var sb = arr.Aggregate( new StringBuilder(), ( s, i ) => s.Append( i ) );
var result = sb.ToString();
string.Join("", (from i in arr select i.ToString()).ToArray())
In the .NET 4.0 the string.Join can use an IEnumerable<string> directly:
string.Join("", from i in arr select i.ToString())
I've left this here for posterity but don't recommend its use as it's not terribly readable. This is especially true now that I've come back to see if after a period of some time and have wondered what I was thinking when I wrote it (I was probably thinking 'crap, must get this written before someone else posts an answer'.)
string s = string.Concat(arr.Cast<object>().ToArray());
The most efficient way is not to convert each int into a string, but rather create one string out of an array of chars. Then the garbage collector only has one new temp object to worry about.
int[] arr = {0,1,2,3,0,1};
string result = new string(Array.ConvertAll<int,char>(arr, x => Convert.ToChar(x + '0')));
This is a roundabout way to go about it its not much code and easy for beginners to understand
int[] arr = {0,1,2,3,0,1};
string joined = "";
foreach(int i in arr){
joined += i.ToString();
}
int number = int.Parse(joined);
If this is long array you could use
var sb = arr.Aggregate(new StringBuilder(), ( s, i ) => s.Append( i ), s.ToString());
// This is the original array
int[] nums = {1, 2, 3};
// This is an empty string we will end up with
string numbers = "";
// iterate on every char in the array
foreach (var item in nums)
{
// add the char to the empty string
numbers += Convert.ToString(item);
}
// Write the string in the console
Console.WriteLine(numbers);
how to convert a string array to nullable integer array.
Well, the two aspects are:
How do you convert an array from one type to another?
How do you convert a string to a nullable int?
The first is simple - you can use Array.ConvertAll, passing in an Converter delegate. There's the LINQ way as well (x.Select(...).ToArray()), but that's slightly less efficient if you know you've got an array to start with and you want an array out of the other end 1.
The string to int? is probably best done in a method. You can do it in an anonymous function, but in this particular case I'd use a separate method. I rarely like to have to declare variables in an anonymous function.
public static int? TryParseInt32(string text)
{
int value;
return int.TryParse(text, out value) ? value : (int?) null;
}
To answer the comment, yes you need the cast 2.
or without the conditional:
public static int? TryParseInt32(string text)
{
int value;
if (int.TryParse(text, out value))
{
return value;
}
else
{
return null;
}
}
Put them together like this:
string[] x = {"15", "10", "hello", "5" };
int?[] y = Array.ConvertAll(x, TryParseInt32);
1 Array.ConvertAll is more efficient than x.Select().ToArray() because it has more information. It can create the final array immediately - no resizing is ever required. Calling Enumerable.ToArray() (with the result of Select()) doesn't have the same information, so it effectively has to add the results to a List<T> (potentially resizing several times along the way) and then usually resize at the end as well. (It doesn't actually use List<T> but the concepts are the same.) It's definitely worth knowing about the Select/ToArray solution, but I don't think it's actually any more readable than ConvertAll in this case, so you might as well use the more efficient form.
2 The reason you need the cast in the conditional is because the compiler doesn't know what type of "null" you really mean - but it knows it can't convert from null to an int. The type of the conditional expression has to be either the type of the second operand or the type of the third operand, and the other one has to be implicitly convertibly. By forcing the third operand to be of type int? here everything is fine - because you can implicitly convert from int to int?. Note that the compiler doesn't take the way you're using the expression to try to work out the type. Another alternative is to use new int?() instead of null.
By parsing and using Linq:
string[] input = { "1", "3", "x" }
var result = input.Select(
s => { int i; return (int.TryParse(s, out i)) ? i : (int?) null; }).ToArray();
… but I grant that this is a bit cryptic. I wouldn’t use a lambda expression here. For clarity, this should belong to a proper function ParseNullableInt. Then you can call it like this:
var result = input.Select(ParseNullableInt).ToArray();
Edit: I removed the null/empty check because TryParse properly handles those cases by returning false.
string[] stringArray = ...;
int?[] nullableIntArray = Array.ConvertAll(stringArray,
s =>
{
int value;
if (!int.TryParse(s, out value))
return default(int?);
return (int?)value;
});
One option would be this (I'm presuming that you want nulls for the values that were not integer values):
public static class StringArrayExtension
{
public static int?[] ToNullableIntArray(this string[] array)
{
int?[] result = new int?[array.Length];
for (int index = 0; index < array.Length; index++)
{
string sourceValue = array[index];
int destinationValue;
if (int.TryParse(sourceValue, out destinationValue))
{
result[index] = destinationValue;
}
else
{
result[index] = null;
}
}
return result;
}
}
usage:
string[] source = { "hello", "1", "3.1415", "20", "foo" };
int?[] dest = source.ToNullableIntArray();
You need to use int.TryParse:
string[] s = { "123", "a", "45" };
int?[] result = new int?[s.Length];
for (int i = 0; i < s.Length; ++i)
{
int a;
if (int.TryParse(s[i], out a))
result[i] = a;
}
List<int?> ints = new List<int?>();
foreach (string str in strs)
{
int val;
if (int.TryParse(str, out val))
{
ints.Add(val);
}
else { ints.Add(null); }
}
return ints.ToArray();
An integer array can not be null. In fact every element in Integer Array will have "0" by default.
Regarding Conversion
Create an Integer array of the same length or an arraylist
int [] _arr=new int[strArray.length];
for(int i=0;i<strArray.length;i++]
{
if(String.IsNullOrEmpty(strArray[i]))
{
_arr[i]=0;
}
else
{
_arr[i]=int.Parse(strArray[i]);
}
}