Java Forum / General / November 2005
String containing algorithm
JS - 25 Nov 2005 18:38 GMT Hi all, Can anyone help me with a small problem I'm having. I need to write a method which takes two Strings of any lengths and returns any letters which are common between the two. The Strings will be something like ABECA and they could be of any length.
For example: ABECA and ECDRE would return EC, I dont mind about the order which they come in because I am processing them further anyway.
I just cant get any algorithms to work on it, not even brute force. Any help is appreciated, thanks in advance. JS
zero - 25 Nov 2005 19:10 GMT > Hi all, > Can anyone help me with a small problem I'm having. I need to write a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Any help is appreciated, thanks in advance. > JS This sounds suspiciously like a homework assignment.
Here's a possible algorithm (no code, I'm sure you can handle that yourself)
prerequisites: Strings A and B of arbitrary length; empty string (or stringbuffer) C.
1. take the first character in string A, and compare it to every character in B 1a. alternative to 1: take the first character in string A, turn it into a CharSequence, and use String method contains() 2. if you have a match, add it to a C 3. take the next character in A, and we're back at 1.
If you want a case-insensitive algorithm just add toLowerCase or toUpperCase.
If you want to weed out duplicates, check if the current character is already contained in C.
 Signature Beware the False Authority Syndrome
Roedy Green - 25 Nov 2005 19:36 GMT >For example: >ABECA and ECDRE would return EC, I dont mind about the order which they come >in because I am processing them further anyway. I would do it with two java.util.BitSets each 64K bits long (possibly shorter if you can guarantee a narrower char range.). Go through String a turning on bits corresponding to chars in bita. (index bit by char number). Then repeat with b and bitb.
Then compute the logical AND of bita and bitb.
 Signature Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
Alan Krueger - 25 Nov 2005 22:16 GMT >>For example: >>ABECA and ECDRE would return EC, I dont mind about the order which they come [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > chars in bita. (index bit by char number). Then repeat with b and > bitb. A sparse set implementation would be better; if you have string lengths far below 64K, it's not going to use very much of that space.
Plus, while Java represents characters internally in UTF-16, there are far more than 2^16 code points possible.
Roedy Green - 25 Nov 2005 23:21 GMT On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:16:12 -0600, Alan Krueger <wgzkid502@sneakemail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Plus, while Java represents characters internally in UTF-16, there are >far more than 2^16 code points possible. char is 16 bits so there can't possibly be more than 2^16 = 64K combinations. With a java.util.BitSet you can track presence with 8K bytes worth of bits (stored as longs in a BitSet).
most of the time you have an upper bound on your unicode chars considerably lower than 64K.
The advantage of BitSet is the speed of direct addressing. Any sparce scheme will have a lot of lookup overhead.
 Signature Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
Alan Krueger - 26 Nov 2005 01:40 GMT > On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:16:12 -0600, Alan Krueger > <wgzkid502@sneakemail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > char is 16 bits so there can't possibly be more than 2^16 = 64K > combinations. There cannot be more than 2^16 char values, but there are far more than 2^16 Unicode code points, depending on your version of Unicode.
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Intl/Supplementary/
"Supplementary characters are characters in the Unicode standard whose code points are above U+FFFF, and which therefore cannot be described as single 16-bit entities such as the char data type in the Java programming language. [...]
"These are now interpreted as UTF-16 sequences, and the implementations of these APIs is changed to correctly handle supplementary characters. The enhancements are part of version 5.0 of the Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition (J2SE) [...]
"The Unicode standard therefore has been extended to allow up to 1,112,064 characters."
Because it's UTF-16, these characters are serialized into 16-bit character sequences, which means that not every character represents a single Unicode code point, sometimes multiple characters are used.
> most of the time you have an upper bound on your unicode chars > considerably lower than 64K. > > The advantage of BitSet is the speed of direct addressing. Any sparce > scheme will have a lot of lookup overhead. No, a properly-sized HashSet will have CONSTANT TIME lookup, just like a lookup table.
Thomas Hawtin - 26 Nov 2005 12:53 GMT >> char is 16 bits so there can't possibly be more than 2^16 = 64K >> combinations.
> http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Intl/Supplementary/
> "The Unicode standard therefore has been extended to allow > up to 1,112,064 characters." That is code points 0-0x10ffff less 0xd800-0xdfff (which are used as surrogate pairs to create the post-16-bit values).
The quoted article doesn't show how to iterate over code points of a String, which goes something like:
final int num = str.length(); for (int off=0; off<num; ) { int codePoint = str.codePointAt(off); ... off += Character.charCount(codePoint); }
What a mess.
>> The advantage of BitSet is the speed of direct addressing. Any sparce >> scheme will have a lot of lookup overhead. > > No, a properly-sized HashSet will have CONSTANT TIME lookup, just like a > lookup table. You call it CONSTANT TIME; I call it ORDER OF MAGNITUDE.
For the typical case of US ASCII characters, the BitSet method will be contained within a mere 16 bytes or so of data. BitSet wins hands down there.
In the worst case scenario, all characters appear. BitSet will expand to actively use around 136 K. A HashSet will be using, say 50 MB. One of these approaches will be more cache-friendly.
In some ways it is similar to the ArrayList vs LinkedList trade-off.
Where HashSet may win is for very short strings with the odd high code point, particularly if the BitSet is not kept.
Tom Hawtin
 Signature Unemployed English Java programmer http://jroller.com/page/tackline/
Alan Krueger - 26 Nov 2005 15:30 GMT >>> char is 16 bits so there can't possibly be more than 2^16 = 64K >>> combinations. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > You call it CONSTANT TIME; I call it ORDER OF MAGNITUDE. It's still an amortised O(c) time algorithm. You're talking about space which is a different issue.
> For the typical case of US ASCII characters, the BitSet method will be > contained within a mere 16 bytes or so of data. BitSet wins hands down [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > actively use around 136 K. A HashSet will be using, say 50 MB. One of > these approaches will be more cache-friendly. In the worst case of the OP's problem, remember that you also have two strings which combined fill at least 1.1 million code points of at least 16 bits each. If the string has duplication, we're already talking about many megabytes of string to walk, which isn't cache-friendly either.
> In some ways it is similar to the ArrayList vs LinkedList trade-off. > > Where HashSet may win is for very short strings with the odd high code > point, particularly if the BitSet is not kept. It also helps that BitSet expands as needed, but one little outlier will make the BitSet expand to its worst-case size, whereas HashSet will only expand when it runs out of room.
Roedy Green - 26 Nov 2005 19:20 GMT On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:40:29 -0600, Alan Krueger <wgzkid502@sneakemail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>There cannot be more than 2^16 char values, but there are far more than >2^16 Unicode code points, depending on your version of Unicode. > >http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Intl/Supplementary/ Here is my new understanding of codepoints. I was under the delusion the 32-bit stuff had no effect on ordinary String and char[]
See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/codepoint.html for the formatted version:
Please speak now, and at any time in future you notice an error:
Unicode started out as a 16-bit code with 64K possible characters. At first, this seemed more than enough to encode all the world's alphabets. Unicode was such a success, scholars also soon wanted to encode dead scripts such as cuneiform as well, and soon all the slots were full.
Unicode was extended to 32 bits, with the corresponding UTF-16 encoding also extended with a clumsy system of surrogate characters to encode the 32-bit characters above 0xffff.
The term codepoint in Java tends to be used to mean a slot in the 32-bit Unicode assignment, though I suspect the term is also valid to mean a spot in Unicode-16 or any other character set.
Java now straddles the 16-bit and 32-bit worlds. You might think Java would now have a 32-bit analog to Character, perhaps called CodePoint, and a 32-bit analog to String, perhaps called CodePoints, but it does not. Instead, Strings and char[] are permitted to contain surrogate pairs which encode a single high-32-bit codepoint.
StringBuilder.append( int codepoint ) will accept 32-bit codepoints to append.
FontMetrics.charWidth( int codepoint ) will tell you the width in pixels to render a given codepoint.
Character.isValidCodePoint( int codepoint ) will tell you if there is a glyph assigned to that codepoint. That is still no guarantee your Font will render it though. Character. codePointAt and codePointBefore let you deal with 32-bit codepoints encoded as surrogate pairs in char arrays. Most of the Character methods now have a version that accepts an int codepoint such as toLowerCase.
 Signature Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
IchBin - 26 Nov 2005 22:46 GMT > On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:40:29 -0600, Alan Krueger > <wgzkid502@sneakemail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > arrays. Most of the Character methods now have a version that accepts > an int codepoint such as toLowerCase. Sorry guys but not to go off into bit land but I threw this together. What is wrong with doing it this way..
public String stringMatch (String in1, String in2, boolean mixedCase) { String key = in1; String target = in2; String foundMatch = "";
if (in1.length()>in2.length()){ key=in2; target=in1; } if (!mixedCase){ key=key.toUpperCase(); target=target.toUpperCase(); } for(int i = 0; i < key.length(); i++){ if ( target.indexOf( key.substring(i,i+1)) > -1) foundMatch = foundMatch.concat( key.substring(i,i+1)); } return foundMatch; }
 Signature Thanks in Advance... IchBin, Pocono Lake, Pa, USA http://weconsultants.servebeer.com/JHackerAppManager __________________________________________________________________________
'If there is one, Knowledge is the "Fountain of Youth"' -William E. Taylor, Regular Guy (1952-)
Thomas Hawtin - 26 Nov 2005 23:05 GMT > Sorry guys but not to go off into bit land but I threw this together. > What is wrong with doing it this way.. Well, it's much more fun to talk about all sorts of esoterica.
> for(int i = 0; i < key.length(); i++){ > if ( target.indexOf( key.substring(i,i+1)) > -1) > foundMatch = foundMatch.concat( key.substring(i,i+1)); > } Firstly, that doesn't take into account code points we were talking about, uses String in places where char would be sufficient, the formatting is a bit odd and != -1 is probably more obvious than > -1, IMO.
Secondly, that looks like an O(n^2) solution to an O(n) problem. Not necessarily a problem, but generally not advisable.
Tom Hawtin
 Signature Unemployed English Java programmer http://jroller.com/page/tackline/
Roedy Green - 26 Nov 2005 23:25 GMT On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 23:05:35 +0000, Thomas Hawtin <usenet@tackline.plus.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Secondly, that looks like an O(n^2) solution to an O(n) problem. Not >necessarily a problem, but generally not advisable. if you could guarantee an upper bound on the length of the two strings, you might find an O(n^2) solution could win out over an O(n).
 Signature Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
Roedy Green - 25 Nov 2005 19:39 GMT >For example: >ABECA and ECDRE would return EC, I dont mind about the order which they come >in because I am processing them further anyway. another approach is to create a HashSet of the chars in string a. Then create another HashSet for String b. Then enumerate HashSet b and remove els that don't exist in set a.
Another approach to is use a nested loop
pseudocode:
for each char in string a for each char in string b
if achar == bchar add to HashSet if not already there.
 Signature Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
Alan Krueger - 25 Nov 2005 22:04 GMT >>For example: >>ABECA and ECDRE would return EC, I dont mind about the order which they come [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > create another HashSet for String b. Then enumerate HashSet b and > remove els that don't exist in set a. Set.retainAll already does that last bit.
> Another approach to is use a nested loop > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > for each char in string b > if achar == bchar add to HashSet if not already there. That's unnecessarily O(n^2) - not horrible for a quick-and-dirty, but to be avoided in production and homework assignments. Sorting them and then linearly merging them would be O(n log n), and the HashSet approach is O(n) when the hash table is large enough and the hash function is well-tuned to the data.
Alan Krueger - 25 Nov 2005 21:55 GMT > Hi all, > Can anyone help me with a small problem I'm having. I need to write a method [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > ABECA and ECDRE would return EC, I dont mind about the order which they come > in because I am processing them further anyway. Please clarify. Your example fits your text, but it also matches a "longest common substring" search. The answers you've received so far appear to address both of these.
For instance, what happens if you use "ABCDEF" and "FEDCBA"? If it's all the letters in common in both strings, you'll get "ABCDEF" in some permutation. If it's a longest common substring, you'll get one of the letters.
If you're truly just searching for all letters in common between the two strings, you might want to use a HashSet<Character> for each string, add each character in each string to its respective HashSet, and obtain the set of common characters by intersecting the sets.
JS - 26 Nov 2005 09:14 GMT Thanks everyone for your help. The easiest one sounds like zeros idea which should work a treat. I'm not worried about the time of the algorithm because it isnt for submission or publication anywhere, and for those of you still left wondering, sorry about my explaination, i meant any letters in any order regardless of where they are. Thanks again JS
> > Hi all, > > Can anyone help me with a small problem I'm having. I need to write a method [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > each character in each string to its respective HashSet, and obtain > the set of common characters by intersecting the sets.
Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
|
|