Searching a UITableView and ignoring punctuation - ios

Is there a way to search through a UITableView and ignore certain characters like commas or dots?
I.e. I would like to search for "St George" but my data set contains "St. George" so the result is always zero.
EDITED Q:
func filteredArray(searchText: NSString) {
if searchText == "" {
array_search = array_all
} else {
showTableViewResults()
array_search.removeAll()
for i in 0 ..< array_all.count {
let object:MyObject = array_all[i]
let languageSearchString = object.myObjectName
let searchStr:String = languageSearchString!
if searchStr.lowercased().contains(searchText.lowercased) {
array_search.append(object)
}
}
}
tableView.reloadData()
recordsFoundLabel.text = "records found: \(array_search.count)"
}

You can filter all characters thats not a letter out of your String before performing your search. The same applies to the table view data source elements. Also as mentioned by rmaddy you should implement a case insensitive search:
edit/update Swift 5.2 or later
extension StringProtocol {
func caseInsensitiveContains<S: StringProtocol>(_ string: S) -> Bool { range(of: string, options: .caseInsensitive) != nil }
}
extension StringProtocol where Self: RangeReplaceableCollection {
var letters: Self { filter(\.isLetter) }
}
Testing:
let search = "st george"
let tableViewSource = ["Apple", "Orange", "Banana", "St. George"]
let filtered = tableViewSource.filter {
$0.letters.caseInsensitiveContains(search.letters)
}
print(filtered) // ["St. George"]
If you would like to literally just remove punctuation from your String (note that would keep the spaces in your String), you can do as follow:
extension StringProtocol where Self: RangeReplaceableCollection {
mutating func removePunctuation() { removeAll(where: \.isPunctuation) }
}
extension Bool {
var negated: Bool { !self }
}
extension StringProtocol where Self: RangeReplaceableCollection {
var removingPunctuation: Self { filter(\.isPunctuation.negated) }
}
Testing:
let filtered = tableViewSource.filter {
$0.removingPunctuation.caseInsensitiveContains(search.removingPunctuation)
}
print(filtered) // ["St. George"]
If you would like to implement the same logic as Xcode autocomplete you would need to do a search for each character and change the startIndex of the string searched:
extension StringProtocol where Self: RangeReplaceableCollection {
func containsCharactersInSequence<S: StringProtocol>(_ string: S, options: String.CompareOptions = []) -> (result: Bool, ranges: [Range<Index>]) {
var found = 0
var startIndex = self.startIndex
var index = string.startIndex
var ranges: [Range<Index>] = []
while index < string.endIndex,
let range = self[startIndex...].range(of: string[index...index], options: options) {
ranges.append(range)
startIndex = range.upperBound
string.formIndex(after: &index)
found += 1
}
return (found == string.count, ranges)
}
}
Playground Testing:
let search = "stgre"
let tableViewSource = ["Apple", "Orange", "Banana", "St. George"]
let filtered = tableViewSource.filter {
$0.containsCharactersInSequence(search, options: .caseInsensitive).result
}
print(filtered) // ["St. George"]

I think you should simply implement a function that for any given string, will return te same string without any point, (or whatever you want to erase); such as :
func erase(characters: [String], fromText text: String) -> String {
var result = String()
for character in text.characters {
if !characters.contains(character) {
result += String(character)
}
}
return result
}
(I cant test it from where i am but you get the idea right ?)
Hope it helps

Related

Swift iOS -Compare elements in 1 array by property

I have an array of objects and I want to compare the objects based on property to find out if the properties are all the same. Right now I loop through all the objects, place all values of the properties in a separate array, and then use filterArr.allSatisfy { $0 == filterArr.last } to detemermine wether the properties are all the same or not.
This method works but I know there has to be a more elegant way then what I'm doing.
I actually went looking for an answer to this but every single thing I came across was comparing the elements of 2 different arrays instead of 1.
class IceCream {
var flavor: String?
var price: Double?
}
let iceCream1 = IceCream()
iceCream1.flavor = "vanilla"
iceCream1.price = 1.5
let iceCream2 = IceCream()
iceCream2.flavor = "chocolate"
iceCream2.price = 2.0
let iceCream3 = IceCream()
iceCream3.flavor = "vanilla"
iceCream3.price = 1.5
let iceCream4 = IceCream()
iceCream4.flavor = "strawberry"
iceCream4.price = 2.5
let iceCreams = [iceCream1, iceCream2, iceCream3, iceCream4]
var filterArr = [String]()
for iceCream in iceCreams {
filterArr.append(iceCream.flavor ?? "")
}
let areItemsEqual = filterArr.allSatisfy { $0 == filterArr.last }
print(areItemsEqual) // prints false
You can avoid having to initialize and then assign the properties on separate lines with a struct.
struct IceCream {
let flavor: String?
let price: Double?
}
let iceCreams: [IceCream] = [
IceCream(flavor: "vanilla", price: 1.5),
IceCream(flavor: "chocolate", price: 2.0),
IceCream(flavor: "vanilla", price: 1.5),
IceCream(flavor: "strawberry", price: 2.5)
]
Using the generics sugar provided by #Alexander and #matt, we have a nice looking extension.
extension Collection {
func allEqual<T: Equatable>(by key: KeyPath<Element, T>) -> Bool {
return allSatisfy { first?[keyPath:key] == $0[keyPath:key] }
}
}
print(iceCreams.allEqual(by: \.flavor))
Alternatively, you could specify an IceCream be equal to one another by flavor.
extension IceCream: Equatable {
static func == (lhs: IceCream, rhs: IceCream) -> Bool {
return lhs.flavor == rhs.flavor
}
}
extension Collection where Element: Equatable {
func allEqual() -> Bool {
return allSatisfy { first == $0 }
}
}
print(iceCreams.allEqual())
Here's a pretty Swifty way to do it. I define an extension on Collection that checks for equality among the collection's items, according to a given predicate:
extension Collection {
func allEqual<T: Equatable>(by deriveKey: (Element) -> T) -> Bool {
guard let firstElement = self.first else {
return true // empty lists are all-equal
}
let sampleKey = deriveKey(firstElement)
return self.dropFirst().allSatisfy{ deriveKey($0) == sampleKey }
}
}
struct IceCream {
let flavor: String
let price: Double
}
let iceCreams = [
IceCream(flavor: "vanilla", price: 1.5),
IceCream(flavor: "chocolate", price: 2.0),
IceCream(flavor: "vanilla", price: 1.5),
IceCream(flavor: "strawberry", price: 2.5)
]
let allItemsEqualByFlavour = iceCreams.allEqual(by: { $0.flavor})
print(allItemsEqualByFlavour) // false
let vanillaOnlyIceCreams = iceCreams.filter{ $0.flavor == "vanilla" }
print(vanillaOnlyIceCreams.allEqual(by: { $0.flavor})) // true
Here's an elegant way to make sure your ice creams are the same along any arbitrary axis, i.e. either flavor or price or any other equatable property you may later inject:
extension Array {
func allSameForProperty<T:Equatable> (_ p:KeyPath<Element,T>) -> Bool {
return self.isEmpty || self.allSatisfy{
self.first![keyPath:p] == $0[keyPath:p]
}
}
}
Let's test it. First, some initial conditions:
struct Icecream {
let flavor : String
let price : Double
}
let arr = [
Icecream(flavor: "vanilla", price: 1.5),
Icecream(flavor: "vanilla", price: 1.75)
]
And now the actual test:
arr.allSameForProperty(\Icecream.flavor) // true
arr.allSameForProperty(\Icecream.price) // false

String initializer for optional primitive types: Int? Double? Float? etc

Is it possible to have an extension for all of the above types without specifying each type individually?
For example, here is such extension for Double:
extension String {
init?(_ value: Double?) {
if let nonOpt = value {
self.init(nonOpt)
} else {
return nil
}
}
}
let nonOpt: Double = 1
let opt: Double? = 1
let string = String(opt)
print(string)
I'd like to allow string initialization with optional type if it is possible to initialize string with the original type.
Do you mean something like this
extension String {
init?<T : CustomStringConvertible>(_ value : T?) {
guard let value = value else { return nil }
self.init(describing: value)
}
}
or
extension String {
init?<T : LosslessStringConvertible>(_ value : T?) {
guard let value = value else { return nil }
self.init(value)
}
}
Rather than declaring an custom initializer, just use map to map the value to a String as such:
let optDouble: Double? = nil
let optionalDoubleString = opt.map { String($0) }
let optInt: Int? = nil
let optionalIntString = opt.map { String($0) }

IOS Swift Searching table from an Array

I have just started to learn swift and i am looking at the tableview and searchbar feature. Below i have my array which is a list of fruits:
var fruits: [[String]] = [["Apple", "Green"],["Pear", "Green"], ["Banana", "Yellow"], ["Orange", "Orange"]]
I have them in a table view with the name of the fruit as the title and the colour as a subtitle. I am trying to use the search bar to filter but i cant seem to get it right. I only want to search for the name of the fruit not the colour.
var filteredFruits = [String]()
var shouldShowSearchResults = false
func searchBar(_ searchBar: UISearchBar, textDidChange searchText: String) {
filteredFruits.removeAll()
var i = 0
while i < fruits.count
{
var filteredFruits = fruits[i].filter ({ (fruit: String) -> Bool in
return fruit.lowercased().range(of: searchText.lowercased()) != nil
})
if searchText != ""
{
shouldShowSearchResults = true
if filteredItems.count > 0
{
filteredFruits.append(filteredItems[0])
filteredItems.removeAll()
}
}
else
{
shouldShowSearchResults = false
}
i += 1
}
self.tableView.reloadData()
}
I do get results returned but it mixes up the subtitles and the titles as well as not returning the correct results. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
I do not understand why you iterate over the fruits using some kind of while loop. Instead I would propose you take advantage of a function like:
func filterFruits(searchText: String) -> [[String]] {
guard searchText != "" else {
return fruits
}
let needle = searchText.lowercased()
return fruits.filter {fruitObj in
return fruitObj.first!.lowercased().contains(needle)
}
}
That function returns all fruits that have a name containing the searchText.
filterFruits(searchText: "g") yields [["Orange", "Orange"]]
If you want to search through all attributes use something like:
func filterFruits(searchText: String) -> [[String]] {
guard searchText != "" else {
return fruits
}
let needle = searchText.lowercased()
return fruits.filter {fruitObj in
return fruitObj.contains { attribute in
attribute.lowercased().contains(needle)
}
}
}
filterFruits(searchText: "g") yields [["Apple", "Green"], ["Pear", "Green"], ["Orange", "Orange"]]
To get you on the right track for the future: you should really introduce a Fruit class which holds all relevant information of one specific fruit instance. Then you can use the first function and do something like fruitObj.matches(searchText) where you define a func inside the Fruit class which determines if the fruit matches the search.
How about this?
var filteredFruits = fruits.filter ({ (fruitData: [String]) -> Bool in
let fruit = fruitData[0]
return fruit.lowercased().range(of: searchText.lowercased()) != nil
})
I see your code is too complicated, let keep everything is simple.
let fruits: [[String]] = [["Apple", "Green"],["Pear", "Green"], ["Banana", "Yellow"], ["Orange", "Orange"]]
var filteredFruits = [String]()
var shouldShowSearchResults = false
func searchBar(_ searchBar: UISearchBar, textDidChange searchText: String) {
filteredFruits.removeAll()
if searchText.isEmpty {
// do something if searchText is empty
} else {
let arr = fruits.filter({ (fruit) -> Bool in
return fruit[0].lowercased().contains(searchText.lowercased())
})
filteredFruits = arr.map({ (fruit) -> String in // convert [[String]] -> [String]
return fruit[0]
})
}
self.tableView.reloadData()
}
I think it'll be better if the type of filteredFruits as same as fruits's type. And instead of [[String]], you can declare an array of type or tuple like this let fruits: [(name: String, color: String)] = [(name: "Apple", color: "Green")]

Avoiding duplicating tuples in Swift

In my watchOS2 app I have array of tuples like this:
var medicines = [(String, String?, String?)]()
And in refreshing function i'd like to clear this array of tuples to append it with new String items. How can i do this ? I want to avoid having the same things in my array. Or maybe there is a better idea ?
My refresh function:
let iNeedCoreData = ["Value": "CoreData"]
session.sendMessage(iNeedCoreData, replyHandler: { (content: [String: AnyObject]) -> Void in
if let meds = content["reply"] as? [String: [String]] {
self.medicines = [(String, String?, String?)]()
if let medicineNames = meds["medicines"], amountNames = meds["amount"], timeNames = meds["time"] {
if medicineNames.count != 0 {
self.addMedicines(medicineNames)
self.addQuantities(amountNames)
self.addTime(timeNames)
self.table.setHidden(false)
self.reloadTable()
} else {
self.alertLabel.setHidden(false)
}
}
}
}) { (error) -> Void in
print("We got an error from our watch device:" + error.domain)
}
Adding to tuple funcs:
func reloadTable() {
self.table.setNumberOfRows(medicines.count, withRowType: "tableRowController")
var rowIndex = 0
for item in medicines {
if let row = self.table.rowControllerAtIndex(rowIndex) as? tableRowController {
row.medicineLabel.setText(item.0)
if let quantity = item.1, time = item.2 {
row.amountLabel.setText(quantity)
row.timeLabel.setText(time)
}
rowIndex++
}
}
}
func addMedicines(medicineNames: [String]) {
for name in medicineNames {
medicines.append((name, nil, nil))
}
}
func addQuantities(quantities: [String]) {
guard medicines.count == quantities.count else { return }
for i in 0..<medicines.count {
medicines[i].1 = quantities[i]
}
}
func addTime(timeNames: [String]) {
guard medicines.count == timeNames.count else { return }
for i in 0..<medicines.count {
medicines[i].2 = timeNames[i]
}
}
Once the var has been declared, type hints are no longer needed.
self.medicines = []
I've tried to think of a few ways to overcome your problem here, but your code is very inflexible and needs to be refactored.
You are at the limit for the utility of tuples and need to turn medicine into a class or struct (use a struct) which supports Equatable.
In addition, you need to create an array of new objects, which can be merged into the existing self.medicines, building the new objects directly in self.medicines is very limiting.
Here is the tuple as a struct
struct Medicine: Equatable {
let name: String
let amount: String
let time: String
}
func == (lhs: Medicine, rhs: Medicine) -> Bool {
return lhs.name == rhs.name && lhs.amount == rhs.amount && lhs.time == rhs.time
}
Here is adding new values without removing old values or having duplicates
if let names = meds["medicines"], amounts = meds["amount"], times = meds["time"]
where names.count == amounts.count && names.count == times.count
{
for i in 0..<names.count {
let medicine = Medicine(name: names[i], amount: amounts[i], time: times[i])
if !medicines.contains(medicine) {
medicines.append(medicine)
}
}
}

Array extension to remove object by value

extension Array {
func removeObject<T where T : Equatable>(object: T) {
var index = find(self, object)
self.removeAtIndex(index)
}
}
However, I get an error on var index = find(self, object)
'T' is not convertible to 'T'
I also tried with this method signature: func removeObject(object: AnyObject), however, I get the same error:
'AnyObject' is not convertible to 'T'
What is the proper way to do this?
As of Swift 2, this can be achieved with a protocol extension method.
removeObject() is defined as a method on all types conforming
to RangeReplaceableCollectionType (in particular on Array) if
the elements of the collection are Equatable:
extension RangeReplaceableCollectionType where Generator.Element : Equatable {
// Remove first collection element that is equal to the given `object`:
mutating func removeObject(object : Generator.Element) {
if let index = self.indexOf(object) {
self.removeAtIndex(index)
}
}
}
Example:
var ar = [1, 2, 3, 2]
ar.removeObject(2)
print(ar) // [1, 3, 2]
Update for Swift 2 / Xcode 7 beta 2: As Airspeed Velocity noticed
in the comments, it is now actually possible to write a method on a generic type that is more restrictive on the template, so the method
could now actually be defined as an extension of Array:
extension Array where Element : Equatable {
// ... same method as above ...
}
The protocol extension still has the advantage of being applicable to
a larger set of types.
Update for Swift 3:
extension Array where Element: Equatable {
// Remove first collection element that is equal to the given `object`:
mutating func remove(object: Element) {
if let index = index(of: object) {
remove(at: index)
}
}
}
Update for Swift 5:
extension Array where Element: Equatable {
/// Remove first collection element that is equal to the given `object` or `element`:
mutating func remove(element: Element) {
if let index = firstIndex(of: element) {
remove(at: index)
}
}
}
You cannot write a method on a generic type that is more restrictive on the template.
NOTE: as of Swift 2.0, you can now write methods that are more restrictive on the template. If you have upgraded your code to 2.0, see other answers further down for new options to implement this using extensions.
The reason you get the error 'T' is not convertible to 'T' is that you are actually defining a new T in your method that is not related at all to the original T. If you wanted to use T in your method, you can do so without specifying it on your method.
The reason that you get the second error 'AnyObject' is not convertible to 'T' is that all possible values for T are not all classes. For an instance to be converted to AnyObject, it must be a class (it cannot be a struct, enum, etc.).
Your best bet is to make it a function that accepts the array as an argument:
func removeObject<T : Equatable>(object: T, inout fromArray array: [T]) {
}
Or instead of modifying the original array, you can make your method more thread safe and reusable by returning a copy:
func arrayRemovingObject<T : Equatable>(object: T, fromArray array: [T]) -> [T] {
}
As an alternative that I don't recommend, you can have your method fail silently if the type stored in the array cannot be converted to the the methods template (that is equatable). (For clarity, I am using U instead of T for the method's template):
extension Array {
mutating func removeObject<U: Equatable>(object: U) {
var index: Int?
for (idx, objectToCompare) in enumerate(self) {
if let to = objectToCompare as? U {
if object == to {
index = idx
}
}
}
if(index != nil) {
self.removeAtIndex(index!)
}
}
}
var list = [1,2,3]
list.removeObject(2) // Successfully removes 2 because types matched
list.removeObject("3") // fails silently to remove anything because the types don't match
list // [1, 3]
Edit To overcome the silent failure you can return the success as a bool:
extension Array {
mutating func removeObject<U: Equatable>(object: U) -> Bool {
for (idx, objectToCompare) in self.enumerate() { //in old swift use enumerate(self)
if let to = objectToCompare as? U {
if object == to {
self.removeAtIndex(idx)
return true
}
}
}
return false
}
}
var list = [1,2,3,2]
list.removeObject(2)
list
list.removeObject(2)
list
briefly and concisely:
func removeObject<T : Equatable>(object: T, inout fromArray array: [T])
{
var index = find(array, object)
array.removeAtIndex(index!)
}
After reading all the above, to my mind the best answer is:
func arrayRemovingObject<U: Equatable>(object: U, # fromArray:[U]) -> [U] {
return fromArray.filter { return $0 != object }
}
Sample:
var myArray = ["Dog", "Cat", "Ant", "Fish", "Cat"]
myArray = arrayRemovingObject("Cat", fromArray:myArray )
Swift 2 (xcode 7b4) array extension:
extension Array where Element: Equatable {
func arrayRemovingObject(object: Element) -> [Element] {
return filter { $0 != object }
}
}
Sample:
var myArray = ["Dog", "Cat", "Ant", "Fish", "Cat"]
myArray = myArray.arrayRemovingObject("Cat" )
Swift 3.1 update
Came back to this now that Swift 3.1 is out. Below is an extension which provides exhaustive, fast, mutating and creating variants.
extension Array where Element:Equatable {
public mutating func remove(_ item:Element ) {
var index = 0
while index < self.count {
if self[index] == item {
self.remove(at: index)
} else {
index += 1
}
}
}
public func array( removing item:Element ) -> [Element] {
var result = self
result.remove( item )
return result
}
}
Samples:
// Mutation...
var array1 = ["Cat", "Dog", "Turtle", "Cat", "Fish", "Cat"]
array1.remove("Cat")
print(array1) // ["Dog", "Turtle", "Socks"]
// Creation...
let array2 = ["Cat", "Dog", "Turtle", "Cat", "Fish", "Cat"]
let array3 = array2.array(removing:"Cat")
print(array3) // ["Dog", "Turtle", "Fish"]
With protocol extensions you can do this,
extension Array where Element: Equatable {
mutating func remove(object: Element) {
if let index = indexOf({ $0 == object }) {
removeAtIndex(index)
}
}
}
Same functionality for classes,
Swift 2
extension Array where Element: AnyObject {
mutating func remove(object: Element) {
if let index = indexOf({ $0 === object }) {
removeAtIndex(index)
}
}
}
Swift 3
extension Array where Element: AnyObject {
mutating func remove(object: Element) {
if let index = index(where: { $0 === object }) {
remove(at: index)
}
}
}
But if a class implements Equatable it becomes ambiguous and the compiler gives an throws an error.
With using protocol extensions in swift 2.0
extension _ArrayType where Generator.Element : Equatable{
mutating func removeObject(object : Self.Generator.Element) {
while let index = self.indexOf(object){
self.removeAtIndex(index)
}
}
}
what about to use filtering? the following works quite well even with [AnyObject].
import Foundation
extension Array {
mutating func removeObject<T where T : Equatable>(obj: T) {
self = self.filter({$0 as? T != obj})
}
}
Maybe I didn't understand the question.
Why wouldn't this work?
import Foundation
extension Array where Element: Equatable {
mutating func removeObject(object: Element) {
if let index = self.firstIndex(of: object) {
self.remove(at: index)
}
}
}
var testArray = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0]
testArray.removeObject(object: 6)
let newArray = testArray
var testArray2 = ["1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9", "0"]
testArray2.removeObject(object: "6")
let newArray2 = testArray2
No need to extend:
var ra = [7, 2, 5, 5, 4, 5, 3, 4, 2]
print(ra) // [7, 2, 5, 5, 4, 5, 3, 4, 2]
ra.removeAll(where: { $0 == 5 })
print(ra) // [7, 2, 4, 3, 4, 2]
if let i = ra.firstIndex(of: 4) {
ra.remove(at: i)
}
print(ra) // [7, 2, 3, 4, 2]
if let j = ra.lastIndex(of: 2) {
ra.remove(at: j)
}
print(ra) // [7, 2, 3, 4]
There is another possibility of removing an item from an array without having possible unsafe usage, as the generic type of the object to remove cannot be the same as the type of the array. Using optionals is also not the perfect way to go as they are very slow. You could therefore use a closure like it is already used when sorting an array for example.
//removes the first item that is equal to the specified element
mutating func removeFirst(element: Element, equality: (Element, Element) -> Bool) -> Bool {
for (index, item) in enumerate(self) {
if equality(item, element) {
self.removeAtIndex(index)
return true
}
}
return false
}
When you extend the Array class with this function you can remove elements by doing the following:
var array = ["Apple", "Banana", "Strawberry"]
array.removeFirst("Banana") { $0 == $1 } //Banana is now removed
However you could even remove an element only if it has the same memory address (only for classes conforming to AnyObject protocol, of course):
let date1 = NSDate()
let date2 = NSDate()
var array = [date1, date2]
array.removeFirst(NSDate()) { $0 === $1 } //won't do anything
array.removeFirst(date1) { $0 === $1 } //array now contains only 'date2'
The good thing is, that you can specify the parameter to compare. For example when you have an array of arrays, you can specify the equality closure as { $0.count == $1.count } and the first array having the same size as the one to remove is removed from the array.
You could even shorten the function call by having the function as mutating func removeFirst(equality: (Element) -> Bool) -> Bool, then replace the if-evaluation with equality(item) and call the function by array.removeFirst({ $0 == "Banana" }) for example.
Using indexOf instead of a for or enumerate:
extension Array where Element: Equatable {
mutating func removeElement(element: Element) -> Element? {
if let index = indexOf(element) {
return removeAtIndex(index)
}
return nil
}
mutating func removeAllOccurrencesOfElement(element: Element) -> Int {
var occurrences = 0
while true {
if let index = indexOf(element) {
removeAtIndex(index)
occurrences++
} else {
return occurrences
}
}
}
}
I finally ended up with following code.
extension Array where Element: Equatable {
mutating func remove<Element: Equatable>(item: Element) -> Array {
self = self.filter { $0 as? Element != item }
return self
}
}
Your problem is T is not related to the type of your array in anyway for example you could have
var array = [1,2,3,4,5,6]
array.removeObject(object:"four")
"six" is Equatable, but its not a type that can be compared to Integer, if you change it to
var array = [1,2,3,4,5,6]
extension Array where Element : Equatable {
mutating func removeObject(object: Element) {
filter { $0 != object }
}
}
array.removeObject(object:"four")
it now produces an error on calling removeObject for the obvious reason its not an array of strings, to remove 4 you can just
array.removeObject(object:4)
Other problem you have is its a self modifying struct so the method has to be labeled as so and your reference to it at the top has to be a var
Implementation in Swift 2:
extension Array {
mutating func removeObject<T: Equatable>(object: T) -> Bool {
var index: Int?
for (idx, objectToCompare) in self.enumerate() {
if let toCompare = objectToCompare as? T {
if toCompare == object {
index = idx
break
}
}
}
if(index != nil) {
self.removeAtIndex(index!)
return true
} else {
return false
}
}
}
I was able to get it working with:
extension Array {
mutating func removeObject<T: Equatable>(object: T) {
var index: Int?
for (idx, objectToCompare) in enumerate(self) {
let to = objectToCompare as T
if object == to {
index = idx
}
}
if(index) {
self.removeAtIndex(index!)
}
}
}

Resources