I want the Swift version of this code:
NSArray *sortedNames = [names sortedArrayUsingSelector:#selector(localizedCaseInsensitiveCompare:)];
var names = [ "Alpha", "alpha", "bravo"]
var sortedNames = names.sorted { $0.localizedCaseInsensitiveCompare($1) == NSComparisonResult.OrderedAscending }
Update: Providing explanation as per recommendation of a fellow SO user.
Unlike ObjC, in Swift you have sorted() (and sort()) method that takes a closure that you supply that returns a Boolean value to indicate whether one element should be before (true) or after (false) another element. The $0 and $1 are the elements to compare. I used the localizedCaseInsensitiveCompare to get the result you are looking for. Now, localizedCaseInsensitiveCompare returns the type of ordering, so I needed to modify it to return the appropriate bool value.
Update for Swift 2:
sorted and sort were replaced by sort and sortInPlace
Sorting an Array in Swift
Define a initial names array:
var names = [ "gamma", "Alpha", "alpha", "bravo"]
Method 1:
var sortedNames = sorted(names, {$0 < $1})
// sortedNames becomes "[Alpha, alpha, bravo, gamma]"
This can be further simplified to:
var sortedNames = sorted(names, <)
// ["Alpha", "alpha", "bravo", "gamma"]
var reverseSorted = sorted(names, >)
// ["gamma", "bravo", "alpha", "Alpha"]
Method 2:
names.sort(){$0 < $1}
// names become sorted as this --> "[Alpha, alpha, bravo, gamma]"
If your array does not contain Custom Objects (just a string or number type):
var sortedNames = sorted(names, <)
Otherwise if you create a Custom Data Object Class containing custom properties inside:
customDataObjectArray.sort({ $0.customProperty < $1.customProperty })
Most efficient way of sorting in SWIFT
The use of Operator Overloading is the most efficient way to sort Strings in Swift language.
// OPERATOR OVERLOADING
let names = ["Chris", "Alex", "Ewa", "Barry", "Daniella"]
var sortedNames = sorted(names, <)
var reverseOrder = sorted(names, >)
In above code > and < operators are overloaded in Swift to sort Strings.
I have test the code in Playground and conclude that when we use operator overloading it is best for sorting Strings.
Copy below to Playground.
let names = ["Chris", "Alex", "Ewa", "Barry", "Daniella"]
var reversed = sorted (names,
// This is a closure
{ (s1 : String, s2 : String) -> Bool in
return s1 > s2
}
)
println(reversed)
var reverseOrder = sorted(names, {s1, s2 in s1 > s2})
var reverseOrder2 = sorted(names, { $0 > $1} )
// OPERATOR OVERLOADING
var reverseOrder3 = sorted(names, >)
The conclusion from Playground:
From above image you can see that all other ways needs to enumerate loops for sorting 5 strings. Where as when we use Operator overloading it does not required to enumerate loop to sort strings.
Referenced from Swift documentation
If you want to sort your array in ascending order then use below syntax:
var arrayName = sorted(arrayName, <)
as the sorted() is the predefined function in swift and < is used to indicate that the array should be sorted in ascending order. If you want to sort the array in descending order then simply replace < with > as I have shown below:
var arrayName = sorted(arrayName, >)
You can usually use the built-in
func sort<T : Comparable>(inout array: [T])
but if you want to use localizedCaseInsensitiveCompare:, your code can be translated directly using NSArray.
Any method that can be used with Objective-C sortedArrayUsingSelector: can be used with Swift sort (or sorted) provided the type of thing in the array is known. So, in your code:
var arr : [String] = // ...
// it is an array of String, so we can use localizedCaseInsensitiveCompare:
sort(&arr) {return $0.localizedCaseInsensitiveCompare($1) == .OrderedAscending}
Similarly:
var events : [EKEvent] = // ...
sort(&events) {return $0.compareStartDateWithEvent($1) == .OrderedAscending}
In Swift-
let students: Set = ["Kofi", "Abena", "Peter", "Kweku", "Akosua"]
let sortedStudents = students.sorted()
print(sortedStudents)
// Prints "["Abena", "Akosua", "Kofi", "Kweku", "Peter"]"
To sort the elements of your sequence in descending order, pass the greater-than operator (>) to the sorted(isOrderedBefore:) method.
let descendingStudents = students.sorted(isOrderedBefore: >)
print(descendingStudents)
// Prints "["Peter", "Kweku", "Kofi", "Akosua", "Abena"]"
Related
I have 2 Arrays. Say, array1 = [1,2,3,4,5] and array2 = [2,3]. How could I check in swift if array1 contains at least one item from array2?
You can do this by simply passing in your array2's contains function into your array1's contains function (or vice versa), as your elements are Equatable.
let array1 = [2, 3, 4, 5]
let array2 = [20, 15, 2, 7]
// this is just shorthand for array1.contains(where: { array2.contains($0) })
if array1.contains(where: array2.contains) {
print("Array 1 and array 2 share at least one common element")
} else {
print("Array 1 doesn't contains any elements from array 2")
}
This works by looping through array 1's elements. For each element, it will then loop through array 2 to check if it exists in that array. If it finds that element, it will break and return true – else false.
This works because there are actually two flavours of contains. One takes a closure in order to check each element against a custom predicate, and the other just compares an element directly. In this example, array1 is using the closure version, and array2 is using the element version. And that is the reason you can pass a contains function into another contains function.
Although, as correctly pointed out by #AMomchilov, the above algorithm is O(n2). A good set intersection algorithm is O(n), as element lookup is O(1). Therefore if your code is performance critical, you should definitely use sets to do this (if your elements are Hashable), as shown by #simpleBob.
Although if you want to take advantage of the early exit that contains gives you, you'll want to do something like this:
extension Sequence where Iterator.Element : Hashable {
func intersects<S : Sequence>(with sequence: S) -> Bool
where S.Iterator.Element == Iterator.Element
{
let sequenceSet = Set(sequence)
return self.contains(where: sequenceSet.contains)
}
}
if array1.intersects(with: array2) {
print("Array 1 and array 2 share at least one common element")
} else {
print("Array 1 doesn't contains any elements from array 2")
}
This works much the same as the using the array's contains method – with the significant difference of the fact that the arraySet.contains method is now O(1). Therefore the entire method will now run at O(n) (where n is the greater length of the two sequences), with the possibility of exiting early.
With Swift 5, you can use one of the following paths in order to find if two arrays have common elements or not.
#1. Using Set isDisjoint(with:) method
Set has a method called isDisjoint(with:). isDisjoint(with:) has the following declaration:
func isDisjoint(with other: Set<Element>) -> Bool
Returns a Boolean value that indicates whether the set has no members in common with the given sequence.
In order to test if two arrays have no common elements, you can use the Playground sample code below that implements isDisjoint(with:):
let array1 = [1, 3, 6, 18, 24]
let array2 = [50, 100, 200]
let hasNoCommonElement = Set(array1).isDisjoint(with: array2)
print(hasNoCommonElement) // prints: true
#2. Using Set intersection(_:) method
Set has a method called intersection(_:). intersection(_:) has the following declaration:
func intersection<S>(_ other: S) -> Set<Element> where Element == S.Element, S : Sequence
Returns a new set with the elements that are common to both this set and the given sequence.
In order to test if two arrays have no common elements or one or more common elements, you can use the Playground sample code below that implements intersection(_:):
let array1 = [1, 3, 6, 18, 24]
let array2 = [2, 3, 18]
let intersection = Set(array1).intersection(array2)
print(intersection) // prints: [18, 3]
let hasCommonElement = !intersection.isEmpty
print(hasCommonElement) // prints: true
An alternative way would be using Sets:
let array1 = [1,2,3,4,5]
let array2 = [2,3]
let set1 = Set(array1)
let intersect = set1.intersect(array2)
if !intersect.isEmpty {
// do something with the intersecting elements
}
Swift 5
Just make an extension
public extension Sequence where Element: Equatable {
func contains(anyOf sequence: [Element]) -> Bool {
return self.filter { sequence.contains($0) }.count > 0
}
}
Use:
let someArray = ["one", "two", "three"]
let string = "onE, Cat, dog"
let intersects = string
.lowercased()
.replacingOccurrences(of: " ", with: "")
.components(separatedBy: ",")
.contains(anyOf: someArray)
print(intersects) // true
let a1 = [1, 2, 3]
let a2 = [2, 3, 4]
Option 1
a2.filter { a1.contains($0) }.count > 1
Option 2
a2.reduce(false, combine: { $0 || a1.contains($1) })
Hope this helps.
//
// Array+CommonElements.swift
//
import Foundation
public extension Array where Element: Hashable {
func set() -> Set<Array.Element> {
return Set(self)
}
func isSubset(of array: Array) -> Bool {
self.set().isSubset(of: array.set())
}
func isSuperset(of array: Array) -> Bool {
self.set().isSuperset(of: array.set())
}
func commonElements(between array: Array) -> Array {
let intersection = self.set().intersection(array.set())
return intersection.map({ $0 })
}
func hasCommonElements(with array: Array) -> Bool {
return self.commonElements(between: array).count >= 1 ? true : false
}
}
I would like to order a collection of strings in descending order, according to length.
Firstly, I'm not sure if I should be using a set or an array, given that a set is a collection of unordered things and I don't need the elements in the collection to be necessarily in an ordered collection.
I came across the sorted() method and the sorted(by:) method but can't work out how to do the descending order by length - just by alphabetical order.
let strings: Set = ["andy", "ber", "ed", "gerald"]
let descendingStrings = strings.sorted(by: >)
print(descendingStrings)
sorted() takes a closure to do the comparison (the > operator is a closure, since all methods are closures). So:
let descendingStrings = strings.sorted { $0.count > $1.count }
If you just want to order a collection of strings in descending order, according to length, then you can write:
let descendingStrings = strings.sorted { (a, b) -> Bool in
return a.count > b.count
}
And if you want the longest string first and sort the rest ascendingly, then
let descendingStrings = strings.sorted { (a, b) -> Bool in
if a.count == b.count {
return a < b
} else {
return a.count > b.count
}
}
Change the < and > signs according to your needs. Hope this will help.
I have two arrays, one an array of array of profiles and one of the section names:
var sections: [Array<Profile>] = [friends, contacts, other]
var sectionNames = ["Friends", "Contacts", "Other Users"]
How do I filter the names based on whether the sections are empty? I get an error when I try the code below:
sectionNames.filter { index, _ in
sections[index].count > 0
}
Contextual closure type '(String) throws -> Bool' expect 1 argument, but two given
You can use zip and compactMap:
let nonEmptySections = zip(sections, sectionNames).compactMap { $0.isEmpty ? nil : $1 }
Using zip has the advantage that you don't get crashes if the two arrays have different sizes. On the other hand, it can lead to subtle bugs.
I'd recommend that you use a data structure to model you data instead:
struct Section {
let name: String
let profiles: [Profile]
}
This should ease the way you process the sections in your app. And by using #Alexander's suggestion, you can add an isEmpty property to the struct, making it even easier to use
extension Section {
var isEmpty: Bool { return profiles.isEmpty }
}
... later in the code
let nonEmptySections = sections.filter { !$0.isEmpty }
you can try something like this
var ar1:[Array<Int>] = [[1,2],[3,4,],[],[5,6]]
var ar2 = [1,2,3,4]
ar2 = (0 ..< ar1.count).filter {ar1[$0].count > 0}.map {ar2[$0]}
print(ar2) // [1, 2, 4]
I've looked through the methods here but I can't quite find what I'm looking for. I'm new-ish to Swift. I would like to extract a subset from a Dictionary based on a Set of key values, preferably without a loop.
For example, if my key Set is of type Set<String> and I have a Dictionary of type Dictionary<String, CustomObject>, I would like to create a new Dictionary of type Dictionary<String, CustomObject> that contains only the key-value pairs associated with the keys in the Set of Strings.
I can see that I could do this with for loop, by initializing a new Dictionary<String, CustomObj>(), checking if the original Dictionary contains a value at each String in the set, and adding key-value pairs to the new Dictionary. I am wondering if there is a more efficient/elegant way to do this however.
I'd be open to finding the subset with an Array of Strings instead of a Set if there is a better way to do it with an Array of keys.
Many thanks!
Swift 5 - You can do this very simply:
let subsetDict = originalDict.filter({ mySet.contains($0.key)})
The result is a new dictionary with the same type as the original but which only contains the key-value pairs corresponding to the keys in mySet.
Your assumption is correct, there is a more concise/swift-ish way to accomplish what you need.
For example you can do it via reduce, a functional programming concept available in Swift:
let subDict = originalDict.reduce([String: CustomObject]()) {
guard mySet.contains($1.key) else { return $0 }
var d = $0
d[$1.key] = $1.value
return d
}
Or, in two steps, first filtering the valid elements, and then constructing back the dictionary with the filtered elements:
let filteredDict = originalDict.filter { mySet.contains($0.key) }
.reduce([CustomObject]()){ var d = $0; d[$1.key]=$1.value; return d }
forEach can also be used to construct the filtered dictionary:
var filteredDict = [CustomObject]()
mySet.forEach { filteredDict[$0] = originalDict[$0] }
, however the result would be good it it would be immutable:
let filteredDict: [String:CustomObject] = {
var result = [String:CustomObject]()
mySet.forEach { filteredDict2[$0] = originalDict[$0] }
return result
}()
Dummy type:
struct CustomObject {
let foo: Int
init(_ foo: Int) { self.foo = foo }
}
In case you'd like to mutate the original dictionary (instead of creating a new one) in an "intersect" manner, based on a given set of keys:
let keySet = Set(["foo", "baz"])
var dict = ["foo": CustomObject(1), "bar": CustomObject(2),
"baz": CustomObject(3), "bax": CustomObject(4)]
Set(dict.keys).subtracting(keySet).forEach { dict.removeValue(forKey: $0) }
print(dict) // ["foo": CustomObject(foo: 1), "baz": CustomObject(foo: 3)]
So, say I have a dictionary that looks like this:
var data : [Float:Float] = [0:0,1:1,2:1.414,3:2.732,4:2,5:5.236,6:3.469,7:2.693,8:5.828,9:3.201]
How would I programmatically find the highest value in the dictionary? Is there a "data.max" command or something?
let maximum = data.reduce(0.0) { max($0, $1.1) }
Just a quick way using reduce.
or:
data.values.max()
Output:
print(maximum) // 5.828
A Swift Dictionary provides the max(by:) method. The Example from Apple is as follows:
let hues = ["Heliotrope": 296, "Coral": 16, "Aquamarine": 156]
let greatestHue = hues.max { a, b in a.value < b.value }
print(greatestHue)
// Prints "Optional(("Heliotrope", 296))"
Exist a function in the API, named maxElement you can use it very easy , that returns the maximum element in self or nil if the sequence is empty and that requires a strict weak ordering as closure in your case as you use a Dictionary. You can use like in the following example:
var data : [Float:Float] = [0:0,1:1,2:1.414,3:2.732,4:2,5:5.236,6:3.469,7:2.693,8:5.828,9:3.201]
let element = data.maxElement { $0.1 < $1.1} // (.0 8, .1 5.828)
And get the maximum value by the values, but you can change as you like to use it over the keys, it's up to you.
I hope this help you.
Honestly the solutions mentioned above - work, but they seem to be somewhat unclear to me as a newbie, so here is my solution to finding the max value in a Dictionary using SWIFT 5.3 in Xcode 12.0.1:
var someDictionary = ["One": 41, "Two": 17, "Three": 23]
func maxValue() {
let maxValueOfSomeDictionary = someDictionary.max { a, b in a.value < b.value }
print(maxValueOfSomeDictionary!.value)
}
maxValue()
After the dot notation (meaning the ".") put max and the code inside {} (curly braces) to compare the components of your Dictionary.
There are two methods to find max value in the dictionary.
First approach:
data.values.max
Second approach:
data.max { $0.value < $1.value}?.value
If you want to find max key:
data.max { $0.key < $1.key}?.key