...or how can I use the index inside the for loop condition
Hey people
Since we're left with no c style for loops in swift 3 I can't seem to find a way to express a bit more complex for loops so maybe you can help me out.
If I were to write this
for(int i=5; num/i > 0; i*=5)
in swift 3 how would I do that?
The closes I came by was:
for i in stride(from: 5, through: num, by: 5) where num/i > 0
but this will of course iterate 5 chunks at a time instead if i being: 5, 25, 125 etc.
Any ideas?
Thanks
Using a helper function (originally defined at Converting a C-style for loop that uses division for the step to Swift 3)
public func sequence<T>(first: T, while condition: #escaping (T)-> Bool, next: #escaping (T) -> T) -> UnfoldSequence<T, T> {
let nextState = { (state: inout T) -> T? in
// Return `nil` if condition is no longer satisfied:
guard condition(state) else { return nil }
// Update current value _after_ returning from this call:
defer { state = next(state) }
// Return current value:
return state
}
return sequence(state: first, next: nextState)
}
you can write the loop as
let num = 1000
for i in sequence(first: 5, while: { num/$0 > 0 }, next: { $0 * 5 }) {
print(i)
}
A simpler solution would be a while-loop:
var i = 5
while num/i > 0 {
print(i)
i *= 5
}
but the advantage of the first solution is that the scope of the loop variable is limited to the loop body, and that the loop variable is a constant.
Swift 3.1 will provide a prefix(while:) method for sequences,
and then the helper function is no longer necessary:
let num = 1000
for i in sequence(first: 5, next: { $0 * 5 }).prefix(while: { num/$0 > 0 }) {
print(i)
}
All of above solutions are "equivalent" to the given C loop.
However, they all can crash if num is close to Int.max
and $0 * 5 overflows. If that is an issue then you have to check
if $0 * 5 fits in the integer range before doing the multiplication.
Actually that makes the loop simpler – at least if we assume that
num >= 5 so that the loop is executed at least once:
for i in sequence(first: 5, next: { $0 <= num/5 ? $0 * 5 : nil }) {
print(i)
}
For completeness: an alternative to the while loop approach is using an AnyIterator:
let num = 1000
var i = 5
for i in AnyIterator<Int>({
return i <= num ? { defer { i *= 5 }; return i }() : nil
}) {
// note that we choose to shadow the external i variable name,
// such that any access to i within this loop will only refer
// to the loop local immutable variable i.
print(i)
// e.g. i += 1 not legal, i refers to a constant here!
} /* 5
25
125
625 */
This method suffers from the same drawback as the while loop in that the loop "external" i variable persists outside and after the scope of the loop block. This external i variable is not, however, the i variable that is accessible within the loop body, as we let the loop body variable i shadow the external one, limiting access to i within the body to the immutable, temporary (loop scope local) one.
Related
This question already has answers here:
Swift 3 for loop with increment
(5 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
for example, a Java for-loop:
for(int i=0; i<5; i+=1){
//
}
convert to Swift
for index in 0..<5 {
}
but what if i+=2?
I'm new to Swift.. Maybe it's a stupid question, but will be appreciate if you answer it, thx! :-)
Check this
for index in stride(from: 0, to: 5, by: 2){
print(index)
}
You can use this way as well.
var first = 0
var last = 10
var add = 2
for i in sequence(first: first, next: { $0 + add })
.prefix(while: { $0 <= last }) {
print(i)
}
Output will be: 0,2,4,6,8,10
In case if your for loop was doing something more complex than adding constant value to index each iteration you may use something like that:
Assuming you have this for loop:
for(index = initial; condition(index); mutation(index)){
//
}
Where
initial — initial value constant of type T
condition — function (T) -> Bool, that checks if loop should end
mutation — function (T) -> T, that changes index value each iteration
Then it will be:
for index in sequence(first: initial, next: { current in
let next = mutation(current)
return condition(next) ? next : nil
}) {
//
}
...or how can I use the index inside the for loop condition
Hey people
Since we're left with no c style for loops in swift 3 I can't seem to find a way to express a bit more complex for loops so maybe you can help me out.
If I were to write this
for(int i=5; num/i > 0; i*=5)
in swift 3 how would I do that?
The closes I came by was:
for i in stride(from: 5, through: num, by: 5) where num/i > 0
but this will of course iterate 5 chunks at a time instead if i being: 5, 25, 125 etc.
Any ideas?
Thanks
Using a helper function (originally defined at Converting a C-style for loop that uses division for the step to Swift 3)
public func sequence<T>(first: T, while condition: #escaping (T)-> Bool, next: #escaping (T) -> T) -> UnfoldSequence<T, T> {
let nextState = { (state: inout T) -> T? in
// Return `nil` if condition is no longer satisfied:
guard condition(state) else { return nil }
// Update current value _after_ returning from this call:
defer { state = next(state) }
// Return current value:
return state
}
return sequence(state: first, next: nextState)
}
you can write the loop as
let num = 1000
for i in sequence(first: 5, while: { num/$0 > 0 }, next: { $0 * 5 }) {
print(i)
}
A simpler solution would be a while-loop:
var i = 5
while num/i > 0 {
print(i)
i *= 5
}
but the advantage of the first solution is that the scope of the loop variable is limited to the loop body, and that the loop variable is a constant.
Swift 3.1 will provide a prefix(while:) method for sequences,
and then the helper function is no longer necessary:
let num = 1000
for i in sequence(first: 5, next: { $0 * 5 }).prefix(while: { num/$0 > 0 }) {
print(i)
}
All of above solutions are "equivalent" to the given C loop.
However, they all can crash if num is close to Int.max
and $0 * 5 overflows. If that is an issue then you have to check
if $0 * 5 fits in the integer range before doing the multiplication.
Actually that makes the loop simpler – at least if we assume that
num >= 5 so that the loop is executed at least once:
for i in sequence(first: 5, next: { $0 <= num/5 ? $0 * 5 : nil }) {
print(i)
}
For completeness: an alternative to the while loop approach is using an AnyIterator:
let num = 1000
var i = 5
for i in AnyIterator<Int>({
return i <= num ? { defer { i *= 5 }; return i }() : nil
}) {
// note that we choose to shadow the external i variable name,
// such that any access to i within this loop will only refer
// to the loop local immutable variable i.
print(i)
// e.g. i += 1 not legal, i refers to a constant here!
} /* 5
25
125
625 */
This method suffers from the same drawback as the while loop in that the loop "external" i variable persists outside and after the scope of the loop block. This external i variable is not, however, the i variable that is accessible within the loop body, as we let the loop body variable i shadow the external one, limiting access to i within the body to the immutable, temporary (loop scope local) one.
...or how can I use the index inside the for loop condition
Hey people
Since we're left with no c style for loops in swift 3 I can't seem to find a way to express a bit more complex for loops so maybe you can help me out.
If I were to write this
for(int i=5; num/i > 0; i*=5)
in swift 3 how would I do that?
The closes I came by was:
for i in stride(from: 5, through: num, by: 5) where num/i > 0
but this will of course iterate 5 chunks at a time instead if i being: 5, 25, 125 etc.
Any ideas?
Thanks
Using a helper function (originally defined at Converting a C-style for loop that uses division for the step to Swift 3)
public func sequence<T>(first: T, while condition: #escaping (T)-> Bool, next: #escaping (T) -> T) -> UnfoldSequence<T, T> {
let nextState = { (state: inout T) -> T? in
// Return `nil` if condition is no longer satisfied:
guard condition(state) else { return nil }
// Update current value _after_ returning from this call:
defer { state = next(state) }
// Return current value:
return state
}
return sequence(state: first, next: nextState)
}
you can write the loop as
let num = 1000
for i in sequence(first: 5, while: { num/$0 > 0 }, next: { $0 * 5 }) {
print(i)
}
A simpler solution would be a while-loop:
var i = 5
while num/i > 0 {
print(i)
i *= 5
}
but the advantage of the first solution is that the scope of the loop variable is limited to the loop body, and that the loop variable is a constant.
Swift 3.1 will provide a prefix(while:) method for sequences,
and then the helper function is no longer necessary:
let num = 1000
for i in sequence(first: 5, next: { $0 * 5 }).prefix(while: { num/$0 > 0 }) {
print(i)
}
All of above solutions are "equivalent" to the given C loop.
However, they all can crash if num is close to Int.max
and $0 * 5 overflows. If that is an issue then you have to check
if $0 * 5 fits in the integer range before doing the multiplication.
Actually that makes the loop simpler – at least if we assume that
num >= 5 so that the loop is executed at least once:
for i in sequence(first: 5, next: { $0 <= num/5 ? $0 * 5 : nil }) {
print(i)
}
For completeness: an alternative to the while loop approach is using an AnyIterator:
let num = 1000
var i = 5
for i in AnyIterator<Int>({
return i <= num ? { defer { i *= 5 }; return i }() : nil
}) {
// note that we choose to shadow the external i variable name,
// such that any access to i within this loop will only refer
// to the loop local immutable variable i.
print(i)
// e.g. i += 1 not legal, i refers to a constant here!
} /* 5
25
125
625 */
This method suffers from the same drawback as the while loop in that the loop "external" i variable persists outside and after the scope of the loop block. This external i variable is not, however, the i variable that is accessible within the loop body, as we let the loop body variable i shadow the external one, limiting access to i within the body to the immutable, temporary (loop scope local) one.
I have this loop, decrementing an integer by division, in Swift 2.
for var i = 128; i >= 1 ; i = i/2 {
//do some thing
}
The C-style for loop is deprecated, so how can I convert this to Swift 3.0?
Quite general loops with a non-constant stride can be realized
with sequence:
for i in sequence(first: 128, next: { $0 >= 2 ? $0/2 : nil }) {
print(i)
}
Advantages: The loop variable i is a constant and its scope is
restricted to the loop body.
Possible disadvantages: The terminating condition must be adapted
(here: $0 >= 2 instead of i >= 1), and the loop is always executed
at least once, for the first value.
One could also write a wrapper which resembles the C-style for loop
more closely and does not have the listed disadvantages
(inspired by Erica Sadun: Stateful loops and sequences):
public func sequence<T>(first: T, while condition: #escaping (T)-> Bool, next: #escaping (T) -> T) -> UnfoldSequence<T, T> {
let nextState = { (state: inout T) -> T? in
guard condition(state) else { return nil }
defer { state = next(state) }
return state
}
return sequence(state: first, next: nextState)
}
and then use it as
for i in sequence(first: 128, while: { $0 >= 1 }, next: { $0 / 2 }) {
print(i)
}
MartinR's solution is very generic and useful and should be part of your toolbox.
Another approach is to rephrase what you want: the powers of two from 7 down to 0.
for i in (0...7).reversed().map({ 1 << $0 }) {
print(i)
}
I'll suggest that you should use a while loop to handle this scenario:
var i = 128
while i >= 1
{
// Do your stuff
i = i / 2
}
I have a large array that I would like to process by handing slices of it to a few asynchronous tasks. As a proof of concept, I have the written the following code:
class TestParallelArrayProcessing {
let array: [Int]
var summary: [Int]
init() {
array = Array<Int>(count: 500000, repeatedValue: 0)
for i in 0 ..< 500000 {
array[i] = Int(arc4random_uniform(10))
}
summary = Array<Int>(count: 10, repeatedValue: 0)
}
func calcSummary() {
let group = dispatch_group_create()
let queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(QOS_CLASS_USER_INITIATED, 0)
for i in 0 ..< 10 {
dispatch_group_async(group, queue, {
let base = i * 50000
for x in base ..< base + 50000 {
self.summary[i] += self.array[x]
}
})
}
dispatch_group_notify(group, queue, {
println(self.summary)
})
}
}
After init(), array will be initialized with random integers between 0 and 9.
The calcSummary function dispatches 10 tasks that take disjoint chunks of 50000 items from array and add them up, using their respective slot in summary as an accummulator.
This program crashes at the self.summary[i] += self.array[x] line. The error is:
EXC_BAD_INSTRUCTION (code = EXC_I386_INVOP).
I can see, in the debugger, that it has managed to iterate a few times before crashing, and that the variables, at the time of the crash, have values within correct bounds.
I have read that EXC_I386_INVOP can happen when trying to access an object that has already been released. I wonder if this has anything to do with Swift making a copy of the array if it is modified, and, if so, how to avoid it.
This is a slightly different take on the approach in #Eduardo's answer, using the Array type's withUnsafeMutableBufferPointer<R>(body: (inout UnsafeMutableBufferPointer<T>) -> R) -> R method. That method's documentation states:
Call body(p), where p is a pointer to the Array's mutable contiguous storage. If no such storage exists, it is first created.
Often, the optimizer can eliminate bounds- and uniqueness-checks within an array algorithm, but when that fails, invoking the same algorithm on body's argument lets you trade safety for speed.
That second paragraph seems to be exactly what's happening here, so using this method might be more "idiomatic" in Swift, whatever that means:
func calcSummary() {
let group = dispatch_group_create()
let queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(QOS_CLASS_USER_INITIATED, 0)
self.summary.withUnsafeMutableBufferPointer {
summaryMem -> Void in
for i in 0 ..< 10 {
dispatch_group_async(group, queue, {
let base = i * 50000
for x in base ..< base + 50000 {
summaryMem[i] += self.array[x]
}
})
}
}
dispatch_group_notify(group, queue, {
println(self.summary)
})
}
When you use the += operator, the LHS is an inout parameter -- I think you're getting race conditions when, as you mention in your update, Swift moves around the array for optimization. I was able to get it to work by summing the chunk in a local variable, then simply assigning to the right index in summary:
func calcSummary() {
let group = dispatch_group_create()
let queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(QOS_CLASS_USER_INITIATED, 0)
for i in 0 ..< 10 {
dispatch_group_async(group, queue, {
let base = i * 50000
var sum = 0
for x in base ..< base + 50000 {
sum += self.array[x]
}
self.summary[i] = sum
})
}
dispatch_group_notify(group, queue, {
println(self.summary)
})
}
You can also use concurrentPerform(iterations: Int, execute work: (Int) -> Swift.Void) (since Swift 3).
It has a much simpler syntax and will wait for all threads to finalise before returning.:
DispatchQueue.concurrentPerform(iterations: iterations) { i in
performOperation(i)
}
I think Nate is right: there are race conditions with the summary variable. To fix it, I used summary's memory directly:
func calcSummary() {
let group = dispatch_group_create()
let queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(QOS_CLASS_USER_INITIATED, 0)
let summaryMem = UnsafeMutableBufferPointer<Int>(start: &summary, count: 10)
for i in 0 ..< 10 {
dispatch_group_async(group, queue, {
let base = i * 50000
for x in base ..< base + 50000 {
summaryMem[i] += self.array[x]
}
})
}
dispatch_group_notify(group, queue, {
println(self.summary)
})
}
This works (so far).
EDIT
Mike S has a very good point, in his comment below. I have also found this blog post, which sheds some light on the problem.
Any solution that assigns the i'th element of the array concurrently risks race condition (Swift's array is not thread-safe). On the other hand, dispatching to the same queue (in this case main) before updating solves the problem but results in a slower performance overall. The only reason I see for taking either of these two approaches is if the array (summary) cannot wait for all concurrent operations to finish.
Otherwise, perform the concurrent operations on a local copy and assign it to summary upon completion. No race condition, no performance hit:
Swift 4
func calcSummary(of array: [Int]) -> [Int] {
var summary = Array<Int>.init(repeating: 0, count: array.count)
let iterations = 10 // number of parallel operations
DispatchQueue.concurrentPerform(iterations: iterations) { index in
let start = index * array.count / iterations
let end = (index + 1) * array.count / iterations
for i in start..<end {
// Do stuff to get the i'th element
summary[i] = Int.random(in: 0..<array.count)
}
}
return summary
}
I've answered a similar question here for simply initializing an array after computing on another array