I would like to write a function which should return list of integer. Integer list size and max Random number will be defined by user, which user will pass through function parameter. My special requirement is, integer into list can not be redundant.
My approach using Array:
func getRandomNumbers(maxNumber: Int, listSize: Int)-> [Int]{
var randomNumbers = [Int]()
for _ in 1...listSize{
let randomNumber = Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(listSize)))
randomNumbers.append(randomNumber)
}
return randomNumbers
}
Problem: Sometimes i am getting duplicate values with this approach.
I know swift Set doesn't hold duplicate value.
My approach using Set:
func getRandomNumbers(maxNumber: Int, listSize: Int)-> Set<Int>{
var randomNumbers = Set<Int>()
for _ in 1...listSize{
let randomNumber = Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(listSize)))
randomNumbers.insert(randomNumber)
}
return randomNumbers
}
Problem: Sometimes Set size is less then user defined size.
Swift 5 version implementation
extension Int {
static func getUniqueRandomNumbers(min: Int, max: Int, count: Int) -> [Int] {
var set = Set<Int>()
while set.count < count {
set.insert(Int.random(in: min...max))
}
return Array(set)
}
}
For example:
let uniqueNumbers = Int.getUniqueRandomNumbers(min: 1000, max: 1500, count: 10)
An example result:
[1454, 1105, 1305, 1176, 1498, 1127, 1310, 1209, 1373, 1198]
There are 2 problems here:
You don't generate enough numbers. You need to keep generating random numbers until your set is large enough:
func getRandomNumbers(maxNumber: Int, listSize: Int)-> [Int] {
var randomNumbers = Set<Int>()
while randomNumbers.count < listSize {
let randomNumber = Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(maxNumber+1)))
randomNumbers.insert(randomNumber)
}
return randomNumbers
}
You're biasing your random numbers by putting them in the ordering Set chooses, which is highly predictable. You should append your numbers to an array (to keep them in order that they are generated), while still leveraging a set in parallel, for its fast deduplication:
func getRandomNumbers(maxNumber: Int, listSize: Int)-> [Int] {
precondition(listSize < maxNumber, "Cannot generate a list of \(listSize) unique numbers, if they all have to be less than \(maxNumber)")
var randomNumbers = (array: [Int](), set: Set<Int>())
while randomNumbers.set.count < listSize {
let randomNumber = Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(maxNumber+1)))
if randomNumbers.set.insert(randomNumber).inserted { // If the number is unique
randomNumbers.array.append(randomNumber) // then also add it to the arary
}
}
return randomNumbers.array
}
This happens when you get a duplicate random number. Instead of generating listSize random numbers, you could check randomNumbers.count and generate random numbers until it reaches listSize.
You just need to use while count is less than listSize instead of a for loop, not e that you need to pass maxNumber plus one instead of listSize to arc4random_uniform:
func getRandomNumbers(maxNumber: Int, listSize: Int)-> Set<Int> {
var randomNumbers = Set<Int>()
while randomNumbers.count < listSize {
let randomNumber = Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(maxNumber+1)))
randomNumbers.insert(randomNumber)
}
return randomNumbers
}
getRandomNumbers(maxNumber: 10, listSize: 3) // {5, 7, 0}
Here's yet another possibility. I don't claim this is the best, but it seemed to me that IndexSet could be a good way to solve the problem (basically, this idea nerd-sniped me and I had to find an answer), and this is what I came up with.
func getRandomNumbers(maxNumber: Int, listSize: Int)-> [Int]{
guard maxNumber < listSize else { return [] }
var indexSet = IndexSet(integersIn: 0...listSize)
var randomInts = [Int]()
while randomInts.count < maxNumber {
guard let currentInt = indexSet.integerLessThanOrEqualTo(Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(listSize)))) else {
continue
}
randomInts.append(currentInt)
indexSet.remove(currentInt)
}
return randomInts
}
The idea is to create an IndexSet covering 0 to the requested max value, and then randomly remove elements from that set until you have enough of them. It avoids duplication by removing integers from the set as they are used. IndexSet is not actually a Set, it's an efficient way of storing a bunch of unique integers, so it gets the uniqueness of a Set without actually creating a Set containing all integers in the range.
Related
I want to write a program that can make random seats at my school in our diner.
I know this much
import Foundation
var randomNumbers: [Int] = []
for _ in 0...5 {
let randomInt = Int.random(in: 0...160)
randomNumbers.append(randomInt)
}
print(randomNumbers)
This prints 6 numbers between 1 and 160. I want to do this lets say 4 times. How would you make it so you can't sit together with people who you sat with before
I'd create an array of numbers 1-160 and randomize them with the shuffled method. When you want to a subset of the random numbers, grab the last six, then remove the last six from the array. That way you wan't get any duplicates.
class RandomNumberGenerator {
private var possible: [Int] = []
init(range: ClosedRange<Int>) {
reset(range: range)
}
func next(count: Int) -> [Int] {
let result = possible.suffix(count).map { $0 }
possible.removeLast(result.count)
return result
}
func reset(range: ClosedRange<Int>) {
possible = range.map { $0 }.shuffled()
}
private init() {}
}
let rando = RandomNumberGenerator(range: 1...160)
for _ in 0..<4 {
print(rando.next(count: 6))
}
Note that the array will run out of numbers if you call it more than 26 times. So to restore all the values in the array simply call reset:
rando.reset(range: 1...160)
I have a function in Swift that computes the hamming distance of two strings and then puts them into a connected graph if the result is 1.
For example, read to hear returns a hamming distance of 2 because read[0] != hear[0] and read[3] != hear[3].
At first, I thought my function was taking a long time because of the quantity of input (8,000+ word dictionary), but I knew that several minutes was too long. So, I rewrote my same algorithm in Java, and the computation took merely 0.3s.
I have tried writing this in Swift two different ways:
Way 1 - Substrings
extension String {
subscript (i: Int) -> String {
return self[Range(i ..< i + 1)]
}
}
private func getHammingDistance(w1: String, w2: String) -> Int {
if w1.length != w2.length { return -1 }
var counter = 0
for i in 0 ..< w1.length {
if w1[i] != w2[i] { counter += 1 }
}
return counter
}
Results: 434 seconds
Way 2 - Removing Characters
private func getHammingDistance(w1: String, w2: String) -> Int {
if w1.length != w2.length { return -1 }
var counter = 0
var c1 = w1, c2 = w2 // need to mutate
let length = w1.length
for i in 0 ..< length {
if c1.removeFirst() != c2.removeFirst() { counter += 1 }
}
return counter
}
Results: 156 seconds
Same Thing in Java
Results: 0.3 seconds
Where it's being called
var graph: Graph
func connectData() {
let verticies = graph.canvas // canvas is Array<Node>
// Node has key that holds the String
for vertex in 0 ..< verticies.count {
for compare in vertex + 1 ..< verticies.count {
if getHammingDistance(w1: verticies[vertex].key!, w2: verticies[compare].key!) == 1 {
graph.addEdge(source: verticies[vertex], neighbor: verticies[compare])
}
}
}
}
156 seconds is still far too inefficient for me. What is the absolute most efficient way of comparing characters in Swift? Is there a possible workaround for computing hamming distance that involves not comparing characters?
Edit
Edit 1: I am taking an entire dictionary of 4 and 5 letter words and creating a connected graph where the edges indicate a hamming distance of 1. Therefore, I am comparing 8,000+ words to each other to generate edges.
Edit 2: Added method call.
Unless you chose a fixed length character model for your strings, methods and properties such as .count and .characters will have a complexity of O(n) or at best O(n/2) (where n is the string length). If you were to store your data in an array of character (e.g. [Character] ), your functions would perform much better.
You can also combine the whole calculation in a single pass using the zip() function
let hammingDistance = zip(word1.characters,word2.characters)
.filter{$0 != $1}.count
but that still requires going through all characters of every word pair.
...
Given that you're only looking for Hamming distances of 1, there is a faster way to get to all the unique pairs of words:
The strategy is to group words by the 4 (or 5) patterns that correspond to one "missing" letter. Each of these pattern groups defines a smaller scope for word pairs because words in different groups would be at a distance other than 1.
Each word will belong to as many groups as its character count.
For example :
"hear" will be part of the pattern groups:
"*ear", "h*ar", "he*r" and "hea*".
Any other word that would correspond to one of these 4 pattern groups would be at a Hamming distance of 1 from "hear".
Here is how this can be implemented:
// Test data 8500 words of 4-5 characters ...
var seenWords = Set<String>()
var allWords = try! String(contentsOfFile: "/usr/share/dict/words")
.lowercased()
.components(separatedBy:"\n")
.filter{$0.characters.count == 4 || $0.characters.count == 5}
.filter{seenWords.insert($0).inserted}
.enumerated().filter{$0.0 < 8500}.map{$1}
// Compute patterns for a Hamming distance of 1
// Replace each letter position with "*" to create patterns of
// one "non-matching" letter
public func wordH1Patterns(_ aWord:String) -> [String]
{
var result : [String] = []
let fullWord : [Character] = aWord.characters.map{$0}
for index in 0..<fullWord.count
{
var pattern = fullWord
pattern[index] = "*"
result.append(String(pattern))
}
return result
}
// Group words around matching patterns
// and add unique pairs from each group
func addHamming1Edges()
{
// Prepare pattern groups ...
//
var patternIndex:[String:Int] = [:]
var hamming1Groups:[[String]] = []
for word in allWords
{
for pattern in wordH1Patterns(word)
{
if let index = patternIndex[pattern]
{
hamming1Groups[index].append(word)
}
else
{
let index = hamming1Groups.count
patternIndex[pattern] = index
hamming1Groups.append([word])
}
}
}
// add edge nodes ...
//
for h1Group in hamming1Groups
{
for (index,sourceWord) in h1Group.dropLast(1).enumerated()
{
for targetIndex in index+1..<h1Group.count
{ addEdge(source:sourceWord, neighbour:h1Group[targetIndex]) }
}
}
}
On my 2012 MacBook Pro, the 8500 words go through 22817 (unique) edge pairs in 0.12 sec.
[EDIT] to illustrate my first point, I made a "brute force" algorithm using arrays of characters instead of Strings :
let wordArrays = allWords.map{Array($0.unicodeScalars)}
for i in 0..<wordArrays.count-1
{
let word1 = wordArrays[i]
for j in i+1..<wordArrays.count
{
let word2 = wordArrays[j]
if word1.count != word2.count { continue }
var distance = 0
for c in 0..<word1.count
{
if word1[c] == word2[c] { continue }
distance += 1
if distance > 1 { break }
}
if distance == 1
{ addEdge(source:allWords[i], neighbour:allWords[j]) }
}
}
This goes through the unique pairs in 0.27 sec. The reason for the speed difference is the internal model of Swift Strings which is not actually an array of equal length elements (characters) but rather a chain of varying length encoded characters (similar to the UTF model where special bytes indicate that the following 2 or 3 bytes are part of a single character. There is no simple Base+Displacement indexing of such a structure which must always be iterated from the beginning to get to the Nth element.
Note that I used unicodeScalars instead of Character because they are 16 bit fixed length representations of characters that allow a direct binary comparison. The Character type isn't as straightforward and take longer to compare.
Try this:
extension String {
func hammingDistance(to other: String) -> Int? {
guard self.characters.count == other.characters.count else { return nil }
return zip(self.characters, other.characters).reduce(0) { distance, chars in
distance + (chars.0 == chars.1 ? 0 : 1)
}
}
}
print("read".hammingDistance(to: "hear")) // => 2
The following code executed in 0.07 secounds for 8500 characters:
func getHammingDistance(w1: String, w2: String) -> Int {
if w1.characters.count != w2.characters.count {
return -1
}
let arr1 = Array(w1.characters)
let arr2 = Array(w2.characters)
var counter = 0
for i in 0 ..< arr1.count {
if arr1[i] != arr2[i] { counter += 1 }
}
return counter
}
After some messing around, I found a faster solution to #Alexander's answer (and my previous broken answer)
extension String {
func hammingDistance(to other: String) -> Int? {
guard !self.isEmpty, !other.isEmpty, self.characters.count == other.characters.count else {
return nil
}
var w1Iterator = self.characters.makeIterator()
var w2Iterator = other.characters.makeIterator()
var distance = 0;
while let w1Char = w1Iterator.next(), let w2Char = w2Iterator.next() {
distance += (w1Char != w2Char) ? 1 : 0
}
return distance
}
}
For comparing strings with a million characters, on my machine it's 1.078 sec compared to 1.220 sec, so roughly a 10% improvement. My guess is this is due to avoiding .zip and the slight overhead of .reduce and tuples
As others have noted, calling .characters repeatedly takes time. If you convert all of the strings once, it should help.
func connectData() {
let verticies = graph.canvas // canvas is Array<Node>
// Node has key that holds the String
// Convert all of the keys to utf16, and keep them
let nodesAsUTF = verticies.map { $0.key!.utf16 }
for vertex in 0 ..< verticies.count {
for compare in vertex + 1 ..< verticies.count {
if getHammingDistance(w1: nodesAsUTF[vertex], w2: nodesAsUTF[compare]) == 1 {
graph.addEdge(source: verticies[vertex], neighbor: verticies[compare])
}
}
}
}
// Calculate the hamming distance of two UTF16 views
func getHammingDistance(w1: String.UTF16View, w2: String.UTF16View) -> Int {
if w1.count != w2.count {
return -1
}
var counter = 0
for i in w1.startIndex ..< w1.endIndex {
if w1[i] != w1[i] {
counter += 1
}
}
return counter
}
I used UTF16, but you might want to try UTF8 depending on the data. Since I don't have the dictionary you are using, please let me know the result!
*broken*, see new answer
My approach:
private func getHammingDistance(w1: String, w2: String) -> Int {
guard w1.characters.count == w2.characters.count else {
return -1
}
let countArray: Int = w1.characters.indices
.reduce(0, {$0 + (w1[$1] == w2[$1] ? 0 : 1)})
return countArray
}
comparing 2 strings of 10,000 random characters took 0.31 seconds
To expand a bit: it should only require one iteration through the strings, adding as it goes.
Also it's way more concise 🙂.
I am new in Swift.
I have an error with this code and I can't find any answer on this site.
I print largest number but I want to print largest number's kind.
let interestingNumbers = [
"Prime": [2,3,5,7,11,13],
"Fibonacci": [1,1,2,3,5,8,13],
"Square": [1,4,9,16,25,36]
]
var largestNumber = 0
for (kind, numbers) in interestingNumbers {
for x in numbers {
for y in kind {
if x > largestNumber {
largestNumber = x
}
}
}
}
print("the largest number is = \(largestNumber)")
Try this instead:
var largestNumber = 0
var largestNumberKind: String!
for (kind, numbers) in interestingNumbers {
for x in numbers {
if x > largestNumber {
largestNumber = x
largertNumberKind = kind
}
}
}
print("the largest number is = \(largestNumber)")
print("the largest number kind is = \(largestNumberKind)")
Regarding your original code:
you were only keeping track of the largest number, losing the kind info you wanted. The largestNumberKind variable I added does just that.
looping over the kind: String didn't make any sense (the for y in kind line). Your outside loop already iterates a key at a time, so such inner loop is pointless.
There is nothing wrong with Paulo's approach (with some minor corrections; see comments there), but this is a reasonable problem to explore more functional approaches that don't require looping and mutation.
For example, we can just flatten each kind to its maximum element (or Int.min if it's empty), then take the kind with the highest max:
interestingNumbers
.map { (kind: $0, maxValue: $1.max() ?? .min) } // Map each kind to its max value
.max { $0.maxValue < $1.maxValue }? // Find the kind with the max value
.kind // Return the kind
This does create a slight edge condition that I don't love. If you evaluate the following:
let interestingNumbers = [
"ImaginaryReals": [],
"Smallest": [Int.min],
]
It's not well defined here which will be returned. Clearly the correct answer is "Smallest," but it's kind of order-dependent. With a little more thought (and code) we can fix this. The problem is that we are taking a little shortcut by treating an empty list as having an Int.min maximum (this also prevents our system from working for things like Float, so that's sad). So let's fix that. Let's be precise. The max of an empty list is nil. We want to drop those elements.
We can use a modified version of mapValues (which is coming in Swift 4 I believe). We'll make flatMapValues:
extension Dictionary {
func flatMapValues<T>(_ transform: (Value) throws -> T?) rethrows -> [Key: T] {
var result: [Key: T] = [:]
for (key, value) in self {
if let newValue = try transform(value) {
result[key] = newValue
}
}
return result
}
}
And with that, we can be totally precise, even with empty lists in the mix:
interestingNumbers
.flatMapValues { $0.max() }
.max { $0.1 < $1.1 }?
.key
Again, nothing wrong with Paulo's approach if you find it clear, but there are other ways of thinking about the problem.
BTW, the equivalent version that iterates would look like this:
var largestNumber: Int? = nil
var largestNumberKind: String? = nil
for (kind, numbers) in interestingNumbers {
for x in numbers {
if largestNumber == nil || largestNumber! < x {
largestNumber = x
largestNumberKind = kind
}
}
}
This question already has answers here:
Break A Number Up To An Array of Individual Digits
(6 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
I was wondering if there was a way in Swift to split an Int up into it's individual digits without converting it to a String. For example:
let x: Int = 12345
//Some way to loop/iterate over x's digits
//Then map each digit in x to it's String value
//Return "12345"
For a bit of background, I'm attempting to create my own method of converting an Int to a String without using the String description property or using String Interpolation.
I've found various articles on this site but all the ones I've been able to find either start with a String or end up using the String description property to convert the Int to a String.
Thanks.
Just keep dividing by 10 and take the remainder:
extension Int {
func digits() -> [Int] {
var digits: [Int] = []
var num = self
repeat {
digits.append(num % 10)
num /= 10
} while num != 0
return digits.reversed()
}
}
x.digits() // [1,2,3,4,5]
Note that this will return all negative digits if the value is negative. You could add a special case if you want to handle that differently. This return [0] for 0, which is probably what you want.
And because everyone like pure functional programming, you can do it that way too:
func digits() -> [Int] {
let partials = sequence(first: self) {
let p = $0 / 10
guard p != 0 else { return nil }
return p
}
return partials.reversed().map { $0 % 10 }
}
(But I'd probably just use the loop here. I find sequence too tricky to reason about in most cases.)
A recursive way...
extension Int {
func createDigitArray() -> [Int] {
if self < 10 {
return [self]
} else {
return (self / 10).createDigitArray() + [self % 10]
}
}
}
12345.createDigitArray() //->[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
A very easy approach would be using this function:
func getDigits(of number: Int) -> [Int] {
var digits = [Int]()
var x = number
repeat{
digits.insert(abs(x % 10), at: 0)
x/=10
} while x != 0
return digits
}
And using it like this:
getDigits(of: 97531) // [9,7,5,3,1]
getDigits(of: -97531) // [9,7,5,3,1]
As you can see, for a negative number you will receive the array of its digits, but at their absolute value (e.g.: -9 => 9 and -99982 => 99982)
Hope it helps!
I need to generate a random number.
It appears the arc4random function no longer exists as well as the arc4random_uniform function.
The options I have are arc4random_stir(), arc4random_buf(UnsafeMutablePointer<Void>, Int), and arc4random_addrandom(UnsafeMutablePointer<UInt8>, Int32).
I can't find any docs on the functions and no comments in the header files give hints.
let randomIntFrom0To10 = Int.random(in: 1..<10)
let randomFloat = Float.random(in: 0..<1)
// if you want to get a random element in an array
let greetings = ["hey", "hi", "hello", "hola"]
greetings.randomElement()
You could try as well:
let diceRoll = Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(6)))
I had to add "UInt32" to make it work.
Just call this function and provide minimum and maximum range of number and you will get a random number.
eg.like randomNumber(MIN: 0, MAX: 10) and You will get number between 0 to 9.
func randomNumber(MIN: Int, MAX: Int)-> Int{
return Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(MAX-MIN)) + UInt32(MIN));
}
Note:- You will always get output an Integer number.
After some investigation I wrote this:
import Foundation
struct Math {
private static var seeded = false
static func randomFractional() -> CGFloat {
if !Math.seeded {
let time = Int(NSDate().timeIntervalSinceReferenceDate)
srand48(time)
Math.seeded = true
}
return CGFloat(drand48())
}
}
Now you can just do Math.randomFraction() to get random numbers [0..1[ without having to remember seeding first. Hope this helps someone :o)
Update with swift 4.2 :
let randomInt = Int.random(in: 1..<5)
let randomFloat = Float.random(in: 1..<10)
let randomDouble = Double.random(in: 1...100)
let randomCGFloat = CGFloat.random(in: 1...1000)
Another option is to use the xorshift128plus algorithm:
func xorshift128plus(seed0 : UInt64, _ seed1 : UInt64) -> () -> UInt64 {
var state0 : UInt64 = seed0
var state1 : UInt64 = seed1
if state0 == 0 && state1 == 0 {
state0 = 1 // both state variables cannot be 0
}
func rand() -> UInt64 {
var s1 : UInt64 = state0
let s0 : UInt64 = state1
state0 = s0
s1 ^= s1 << 23
s1 ^= s1 >> 17
s1 ^= s0
s1 ^= s0 >> 26
state1 = s1
return UInt64.addWithOverflow(state0, state1).0
}
return rand
}
This algorithm has a period of 2^128 - 1 and passes all the tests of the BigCrush test suite. Note that while this is a high-quality pseudo-random number generator with a long period, it is not a cryptographically secure random number generator.
You could seed it from the current time or any other random source of entropy. For example, if you had a function called urand64() that read a UInt64 from /dev/urandom, you could use it like this:
let rand = xorshift128plus(urand64(), urand64())
for _ in 1...10 {
print(rand())
}
let MAX : UInt32 = 9
let MIN : UInt32 = 1
func randomNumber()
{
var random_number = Int(arc4random_uniform(MAX) + MIN)
print ("random = ", random_number);
}
In Swift 3 :
It will generate random number between 0 to limit
let limit : UInt32 = 6
print("Random Number : \(arc4random_uniform(limit))")
My implementation as an Int extension. Will generate random numbers in range from..<to
public extension Int {
static func random(from: Int, to: Int) -> Int {
guard to > from else {
assertionFailure("Can not generate negative random numbers")
return 0
}
return Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(to - from)) + UInt32(from))
}
}
This is how I get a random number between 2 int's!
func randomNumber(MIN: Int, MAX: Int)-> Int{
var list : [Int] = []
for i in MIN...MAX {
list.append(i)
}
return list[Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(list.count)))]
}
usage:
print("My Random Number is: \(randomNumber(MIN:-10,MAX:10))")
Another option is to use GKMersenneTwisterRandomSource from GameKit. The docs say:
A deterministic pseudo-random source that generates random numbers
based on a mersenne twister algorithm. This is a deterministic random
source suitable for creating reliable gameplay mechanics. It is
slightly slower than an Arc4 source, but more random, in that it has a
longer period until repeating sequences. While deterministic, this is
not a cryptographic random source. It is however suitable for
obfuscation of gameplay data.
import GameKit
let minValue = 0
let maxValue = 100
var randomDistribution: GKRandomDistribution?
let randomSource = GKMersenneTwisterRandomSource()
randomDistribution = GKRandomDistribution(randomSource: randomSource, lowestValue: minValue, highestValue: maxValue)
let number = randomDistribution?.nextInt() ?? 0
print(number)
Example taken from Apple's sample code: https://github.com/carekit-apple/CareKit/blob/master/CareKitPrototypingTool/OCKPrototyper/CareKitPatient/RandomNumberGeneratorHelper.swift
I'm late to the party 🤩🎉
Using a function that allows you to change the size of the array and the range selection on the fly is the most versatile method. You can also use map so it's very concise. I use it in all of my performance testing/bench marking.
elements is the number of items in the array
only including numbers from 0...max
func randArr(_ elements: Int, _ max: Int) -> [Int] {
return (0..<elements).map{ _ in Int.random(in: 0...max) }
}
Code Sense / Placeholders look like this.
randArr(elements: Int, max: Int)
10 elements in my array ranging from 0 to 1000.
randArr(10, 1000) // [554, 8, 54, 87, 10, 33, 349, 888, 2, 77]
you can use this in specific rate:
let die = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
let firstRoll = die[Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(die.count)))]
let secondRoll = die[Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(die.count)))]
Lets Code with Swift for the random number or random string :)
let quotes: NSArray = ["R", "A", "N", "D", "O", "M"]
let randomNumber = arc4random_uniform(UInt32(quotes.count))
let quoteString = quotes[Int(randomNumber)]
print(quoteString)
it will give you output randomly.
Don't forget that some numbers will repeat! so you need to do something like....
my totalQuestions was 47.
func getRandomNumbers(totalQuestions:Int) -> NSMutableArray
{
var arrayOfRandomQuestions: [Int] = []
print("arraySizeRequired = 40")
print("totalQuestions = \(totalQuestions)")
//This will output a 40 random numbers between 0 and totalQuestions (47)
while arrayOfRandomQuestions.count < 40
{
let limit: UInt32 = UInt32(totalQuestions)
let theRandomNumber = (Int(arc4random_uniform(limit)))
if arrayOfRandomQuestions.contains(theRandomNumber)
{
print("ping")
}
else
{
//item not found
arrayOfRandomQuestions.append(theRandomNumber)
}
}
print("Random Number set = \(arrayOfRandomQuestions)")
print("arrayOutputCount = \(arrayOfRandomQuestions.count)")
return arrayOfRandomQuestions as! NSMutableArray
}
look, i had the same problem but i insert
the function as a global variable
as
var RNumber = Int(arc4random_uniform(9)+1)
func GetCase(){
your code
}
obviously this is not efficent, so then i just copy and paste the code into the function so it could be reusable, then xcode suggest me to set the var as constant so my code were
func GetCase() {
let RNumber = Int(arc4random_uniform(9)+1)
if categoria == 1 {
}
}
well thats a part of my code so xcode tell me something of inmutable and initialization but, it build the app anyway and that advice simply dissapear
hope it helps