Stack implementation in Swift - ios

I'm new to Swift and iOS programming.
I'm trying to test out a simple algorithm and need an array of Stacks. Don't have to be anything fancy (Stacks of Ints will do).
I got the Stack implementation from The Swift Programming Language documentation:
struct IntStack {
var items = [Int]()
mutating func push(item: Int) {
items.append(item)
}
mutating func pop() -> Int {
return items.removeLast()
}
mutating func count() -> Int {
return items.count
}
mutating func show() {
println(items)
}
}
The count and show functions are my contribution. But when I try to declare an array of Stacks I get an error...
var lines = IntStack()[5]
"IntStack" does not have a member named subscript
I'm guessing it has something to do with Optionals but can figure out what it is.
Any help?

Details
Swift 5.1, Xcode 11.3.1
Generic Stack Implementation
Stackable protocol
protocol Stackable {
associatedtype Element
func peek() -> Element?
mutating func push(_ element: Element)
#discardableResult mutating func pop() -> Element?
}
extension Stackable {
var isEmpty: Bool { peek() == nil }
}
Stack
struct Stack<Element>: Stackable where Element: Equatable {
private var storage = [Element]()
func peek() -> Element? { storage.last }
mutating func push(_ element: Element) { storage.append(element) }
mutating func pop() -> Element? { storage.popLast() }
}
extension Stack: Equatable {
static func == (lhs: Stack<Element>, rhs: Stack<Element>) -> Bool { lhs.storage == rhs.storage }
}
extension Stack: CustomStringConvertible {
var description: String { "\(storage)" }
}
extension Stack: ExpressibleByArrayLiteral {
init(arrayLiteral elements: Self.Element...) { storage = elements }
}
Usage
var stack = Stack<Int>()
stack.push(1)
stack.push(2)
stack.push(3)
print(stack.peek())
print(stack.pop())
print(stack)
print(stack == Stack<Int>())
stack = [3,2,1]
print(stack)

There's no problem with what you're doing there - that's just not the syntax for declaring an array. If you want an array of 5 stacks, you can do this:
[IntStack(), IntStack(), IntStack(), IntStack(), IntStack()]
Or, you can initialise the array like this:
Array(count: 5, repeatedValue: IntStack())
Also, you don't need to mark your functions as mutating unless they actually mutate the structure - so count() and show() don't need it.

It's possible to just extend arrays with stack specific methods. This might or might not be what you want, depending on if you want to disallow array like access.
protocol Stack {
associatedtype Element
mutating func push(item: Element)
// allows discarding the result without generating a warning.
#discardableResult
mutating func pop() -> Element?
func peek() -> Element?
var count: Int { get }
}
extension Array: Stack {
mutating func push(item: Element) {
self.append(item)
}
mutating func pop() -> Element? {
if let last = self.last {
self.remove(at: self.count - 1)
return last
}
return .none
}
func peek() -> Element? {
self.last
}
}
Simple test case:
class StackTests: XCTestCase {
func testExample() throws {
var stack = Array<Int>()
XCTAssertEqual(stack.peek(), .none, "stack is empty, peek returns none")
XCTAssertEqual(stack.pop(), .none, "stack is empty, pop returns none")
stack.push(item: 0)
stack.push(item: 1)
stack.push(item: 2)
XCTAssertEqual(stack.peek(), 2)
XCTAssertEqual(stack.pop(), 2)
XCTAssertEqual(stack.peek(), 1)
XCTAssertEqual(stack.pop(), 1)
XCTAssertEqual(stack.peek(), 0)
XCTAssertEqual(stack.pop(), 0)
}
}

There is no need to declare the size of the stack when you init it. Jus calling this should be enough.
var lines = IntStack()
Also note that your count() and show() methods should not be mutating since they don't modify the struct in any way.

Just look into this code. Stack example with generic data type and without using the array.
class Node<T>: CustomStringConvertible {
let value: T
var next: Node?
var description: String {
guard let next = next else { return "\(value)" }
return "\(value)\n" + String(describing: next)
}
init(value: T) {
self.value = value
}
}
// Stack class to hold all items
class Stack<T>: CustomStringConvertible {
var top: Node<T>?
var description: String {
guard let top = top else { return "---- Stack is EMPTY ----" }
return "---- Stack Begin ----\n" + String(describing: top) + "\n---- Stack End ----"
}
// push
func push(_ value: T) {
let currentTop = top
top = Node(value: value)
top?.next = currentTop
}
#discardableResult
func pop() -> T? {
let currentTop = top
top = top?.next
return currentTop?.value
}
#discardableResult
func peek() -> T? {
return top?.value
}
}

Excellent implementation! One thought: I think it should be:
func peek() -> Element? { storage.last }

Here is a Stack implementation using Swift Generics,
struct Fruit {
let fruitName : String
let color : String
init(_ name: String,_ color: String) {
self.fruitName = name
self.color = color
}
}
let fruit1 = Fruit("Apple", "Red")
let fruit2 = Fruit("Grapes", "Green")
let fruitStack = Stack<Fruit>()
fruitStack.push(fruit1)
fruitStack.push(fruit2)
let fruitFfromStack = fruitStack.pop()
print("Fruit popped from Stack, Name : \(String(describing: fruitFfromStack?.fruitName)) ,Color : \(String(describing: fruitFfromStack?.color))")
let fruitFfromStack1 = fruitStack.pop()
print("Fruit popped from Stack, Name : \(String(describing: fruitFfromStack1?.fruitName)) ,Color : \(String(describing: fruitFfromStack1?.color))")
Full code is here :
https://reactcodes.blogspot.com/2019/01/generic-stack-implementation-with.html

Related

How do declare methods that return a Sequence of custom Structs in Swift

What is the proper way to declare a function that return a Sequence in Swift 4. I tried the following but receive a error stating:
error: Models.playground:29:13: error: cannot convert return expression of type 'Cars' to return type 'S'
return Cars(cars)
^~~~~~~~~~
as! S
Here is the code I used:
import Foundation
struct Car {
let make:String
let model:String
}
class Cars: Sequence, IteratorProtocol {
typealias Element = Car
var current = 0
let cars:[Element]
init(_ cars:[Element]) {
self.cars = cars;
}
func makeIterator() -> Iterator {
current = 0
return self
}
func next() -> Element? {
if current < cars.count {
defer { current += 1 }
return cars[current]
} else {
return nil
}
}
}
let cars = Cars([Car(make:"Buick", model:"Century"), Car(make:"Buick", model:"LaSabre")])
func getCars<S:Sequence>(cars:[Car]) -> S where S.Iterator.Element == Car {
return Cars(cars)
}
The return value cannot be a specialization of the Sequence protocol.
You can either return Cars itself, as Daniel suggested, or –
if you want to hide the implementation of the sequence – a
“type-erased” sequence:
func getCars(cars:[Car]) -> AnySequence<Car> {
return AnySequence(Cars(cars))
}
or even
func getCars(cars:[Car]) -> AnySequence<Car> {
return AnySequence(cars)
}
AnySequence is a
generic struct conforming to the Sequence protocol which forwards
to the underlying sequence or iterator from which it was created.
See also A Little Respect for AnySequence
for more examples.
Remark: Similarly, it is possible to make Cars a Sequence
by returning a type-erased iterator which forwards to the array
iterator:
class Cars: Sequence {
typealias Element = Car
let cars: [Element]
init(_ cars: [Element]) {
self.cars = cars;
}
func makeIterator() -> AnyIterator<Element> {
return AnyIterator(cars.makeIterator())
}
}
The problem is that you are using a generic for a specific type. You can either return a Cars element (note that Cars conforms to Sequence, so you are returning a Sequence here):
func getCars(cars: [Car]) -> Cars {
return Cars(cars)
}
or use a generic (also a Sequence, since it is defined in the generic):
func getCars<S: Sequence>(cars: [Car]) -> S {
return cars as! S
}

Queue implementation in Swift language

I m trying to implement Queue collection type in Swift platform. I have got some problems about peek, poll and offer functions. When I try to use these functions in my code, it fails. Do you have any advice or true algorithm for that?
import Foundation
class Node<T> {
var value: T? = nil
var next: Node<T>? = nil
var prev: Node<T>? = nil
init() {
}
init(value: T) {
self.value = value
}
}
class Queue<T> {
var count: Int = 0
var head: Node<T> = Node<T>()
var tail: Node<T> = Node<T>()
var currentNode : Node<T> = Node<T>()
init() {
}
func isEmpty() -> Bool {
return self.count == 0
}
func next(index:Int) -> T? {
if isEmpty() {
return nil
} else if self.count == 1 {
var temp: Node<T> = currentNode
return temp.value
} else if index == self.count{
return currentNode.value
}else {
var temp: Node<T> = currentNode
currentNode = currentNode.next!
return temp.value
}
}
func setCurrentNode(){
currentNode = head
}
func enQueue(key: T) {
var node = Node<T>(value: key)
if self.isEmpty() {
self.head = node
self.tail = node
} else {
node.next = self.head
self.head.prev = node
self.head = node
}
self.count++
}
func deQueue() -> T? {
if self.isEmpty() {
return nil
} else if self.count == 1 {
var temp: Node<T> = self.tail
self.count--
return temp.value
} else {
var temp: Node<T> = self.tail
self.tail = self.tail.prev!
self.count--
return temp.value
}
}
//retrieve the top most item
func peek() -> T? {
if isEmpty() {
return nil
}
return head.value!
}
func poll() -> T? {
if isEmpty() {
return nil
}else{
var temp:T = head.value!
deQueue()
return temp
}
}
func offer(var key:T)->Bool{
var status:Bool = false;
self.enQueue(key)
status = true
return status
}
}
Aside from the bugs, there are a couple of things about your implementation that you probably want to change to make it more Swift-like. One is it looks like you're replicating the Java names like poll and offer – these names are (IMHO) a little strange, and partly related to needing to have two functions, an exception-throwing version and a non-exception version. Since Swift doesn't have exceptions, you can probably just name them using the conventional names other Swift collections use, like append.
The other issue is that your implementation incorporates traversing the queue into the queue itself. It's better to do this kind of traversal outside the collection than mix the two. Swift collections do this with indexes.
Here's a possible Swift-like queue implementation. First, the node and base queue definition:
// singly rather than doubly linked list implementation
// private, as users of Queue never use this directly
private final class QueueNode<T> {
// note, not optional – every node has a value
var value: T
// but the last node doesn't have a next
var next: QueueNode<T>? = nil
init(value: T) { self.value = value }
}
// Ideally, Queue would be a struct with value semantics but
// I'll leave that for now
public final class Queue<T> {
// note, these are both optionals, to handle
// an empty queue
private var head: QueueNode<T>? = nil
private var tail: QueueNode<T>? = nil
public init() { }
}
Then, extend with an append and dequeue method:
extension Queue {
// append is the standard name in Swift for this operation
public func append(newElement: T) {
let oldTail = tail
self.tail = QueueNode(value: newElement)
if head == nil { head = tail }
else { oldTail?.next = self.tail }
}
public func dequeue() -> T? {
if let head = self.head {
self.head = head.next
if head.next == nil { tail = nil }
return head.value
}
else {
return nil
}
}
}
At this point, you're almost done if all you want to do is add and remove. To add traversal, first create an index type, which is a simple wrapper on the node type:
public struct QueueIndex<T>: ForwardIndexType {
private let node: QueueNode<T>?
public func successor() -> QueueIndex<T> {
return QueueIndex(node: node?.next)
}
}
public func ==<T>(lhs: QueueIndex<T>, rhs: QueueIndex<T>) -> Bool {
return lhs.node === rhs.node
}
Then, use this index to conform to MutableCollectionType:
extension Queue: MutableCollectionType {
public typealias Index = QueueIndex<T>
public var startIndex: Index { return Index(node: head) }
public var endIndex: Index { return Index(node: nil) }
public subscript(idx: Index) -> T {
get {
precondition(idx.node != nil, "Attempt to subscript out of bounds")
return idx.node!.value
}
set(newValue) {
precondition(idx.node != nil, "Attempt to subscript out of bounds")
idx.node!.value = newValue
}
}
typealias Generator = IndexingGenerator<Queue>
public func generate() -> Generator {
return Generator(self)
}
}
From conforming to collection type, you get a whole load of stuff for free:
var q = Queue<String>()
q.append("one")
q.append("two")
for x in q {
println(x)
}
isEmpty(q) // returns false
first(q) // returns Optional("one")
count(q) // returns 2
",".join(q) // returns "one,two"
let x = find(q, "two") // returns index of second entry
let counts = map(q) { count($0) } // returns [3,3]
Finally, there's 3 more protocols that are good to conform to: ExtensibleCollectionType, Printable and ArrayLiteralConvertible:
// init() and append() requirements are already covered
extension Queue: ExtensibleCollectionType {
public func reserveCapacity(n: Index.Distance) {
// do nothing
}
public func extend<S : SequenceType where S.Generator.Element == T>
(newElements: S) {
for x in newElements {
self.append(x)
}
}
}
extension Queue: ArrayLiteralConvertible {
public convenience init(arrayLiteral elements: T...) {
self.init()
// conformance to ExtensibleCollectionType makes this easy
self.extend(elements)
}
}
extension Queue: Printable {
// pretty easy given conformance to CollectionType
public var description: String {
return "[" + ", ".join(map(self,toString)) + "]"
}
}
These mean you can now create queues as easily arrays or sets:
var q: Queue = [1,2,3]
println(q) // prints [1, 2, 3]
There are a lot of little issues regarding the internal consistency of your model:
When you first instantiate a new Queue, you are initializing head, tail and current to three different Node objects (even though nothing's been queued yet!). That doesn't make sense. Personally, I'd be inclined to make those three properties optional and leave them as nil until you start enqueuing stuff.
By the way, when you start using optionals for these properties, many of the other methods are simplified.
It looks like you're trying to implement a doubly linked list. So, when you dequeue, you need to not only update the Queue properties, but you also need to update the next pointer for the next item that will be dequeued (because it still will be pointing to that item you already dequeued). You don't want your linked list maintaining references to objects that have been dequeued and should be removed.
When you dequeue the last item, you really should be clearing out head and tail references.
You're implementing a doubly linked list, without regard to the object ownership model. Thus, as soon as you have more than one item in your list, you've got a strong reference cycle between nodes and if not remedied, this will leak if there are still objects in the queue when the queue, itself, is deallocated. Consider making one of the references weak or unowned.
I'd suggest keeping this simple (just enqueue and dequeue). The concept of poll and offer may make sense in terms of an arbitrary linked list, but not in the context of a queue. The implementations of poll and offer are also incorrect (e.g. poll calls deQueue which removes the tail, but the object you return is the head!), but I presume you'd just remove these functions altogether. Likewise, I do not understand the intent of current in the context of a queue.
I'd suggest you make Queue and Node conform to Printable. It will simplify your debugging process.
The following is code of a playground consisting of a queue implemented with an array and a queue implemented with nodes. There are substantial performance differences between the two but if you going to be iterating through a queue you might want to use one with an array.
import UIKit // for NSDate() used in testing)
// QUEUE WITH ARRAY IMPLEMENTATION (For ease of adaptibility, slow enque, faster deque):
struct QueueArray<T> {
private var items = [T]()
mutating func enQueue(item: T) {
items.append(item)
}
mutating func deQueue() -> T? {
return items.removeFirst()
}
func isEmpty() -> Bool {
return items.isEmpty
}
func peek() -> T? {
return items.first
}
}
// QUEUE WITH NODE IMPLEMENTATION (For performance, if all you need is a queue this is it):
class QNode<T> {
var value: T
var next: QNode?
init(item:T) {
value = item
}
}
struct Queue<T> {
private var top: QNode<T>!
private var bottom: QNode<T>!
init() {
top = nil
bottom = nil
}
mutating func enQueue(item: T) {
let newNode:QNode<T> = QNode(item: item)
if top == nil {
top = newNode
bottom = top
return
}
bottom.next = newNode
bottom = newNode
}
mutating func deQueue() -> T? {
let topItem: T? = top?.value
if topItem == nil {
return nil
}
if let nextItem = top.next {
top = nextItem
} else {
top = nil
bottom = nil
}
return topItem
}
func isEmpty() -> Bool {
return top == nil ? true : false
}
func peek() -> T? {
return top?.value
}
}
// QUEUE NODES TEST
let testAmount = 100
var queueNodes = Queue<Int>()
let queueNodesEnqueStart = NSDate()
for i in 0...testAmount {
queueNodes.enQueue(i)
}
let queueNodesEnqueEnd = NSDate()
while !queueNodes.isEmpty() {
queueNodes.deQueue()
}
let queueNodesDequeEnd = NSDate()
// QUEUE ARRAY TEST
var queueArray = QueueArray<Int>()
let queueArrayEnqueStart = NSDate()
for i in 0...testAmount {
queueArray.enQueue(i)
}
let queueArrayEnqueEnd = NSDate()
while !queueArray.isEmpty() {
queueArray.deQueue()
}
let queueArrayDequeEnd = NSDate()
// QUEUE NODES RESULT:
print("queueEnqueDuration: \(queueNodesEnqueEnd.timeIntervalSinceDate(queueNodesEnqueStart)), Deque: \(queueNodesDequeEnd.timeIntervalSinceDate(queueNodesEnqueEnd))")
// QUEUE ARRAY RESULT:
print("queueArrayEnqueDuration: \(queueArrayEnqueEnd.timeIntervalSinceDate(queueArrayEnqueStart)), Deque: \(queueArrayDequeEnd.timeIntervalSinceDate(queueArrayEnqueEnd))")
Queue with Array
struct Queue<T> {
private var list = [T]()
var isEmpty: Bool { return self.list.isEmpty }
var front: T? { return self.list.first }
mutating func enqueue(_ item: T) {
self.list.append(item)
}
mutating func dequeue() -> T? {
guard self.isEmpty == false else { return nil }
return self.list.removeFirst()
}
}
Swift 4 simple Stack for any type; string, int, array, etc.
struct Stack<Element> {
var items = [Element]()
mutating func push(_ item: Element) {
items.append(item)
}
mutating func pop() -> Element {
return items.removeLast()
}
mutating func peek() -> Element {
return items.last!
}
mutating func pushFirst(_ item: Element) {
items.insert(item, at: 0)
}
}
example with strings:
let names = ["Bob", "Sam", "Sue", "Greg", "Brian", "Dave"]
//create stack of string type
var stackOfStrings = Stack<String>()
//add to bottom of stack
for stringName in names {
stackOfStrings.push(stringName)
}
//print and remove from stack
for stringName in names {
print(stringName)
stackOfStrings.pop(stringName)
}
//add to top of stack
for stringName in names {
stackOfStrings.pushFirst(stringName)
}
//look at item in stack without pop
for stringName in names {
//see what Top item is without remove
let whatIsTopItem = stackOfStrings.peek(stringName)
if whatIsTopItem == "Bob" {
print("Best friend Bob is in town!")
}
}
//stack size
let stackCount = stackOfStrings.items.count
more info here:
https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/Swift/Conceptual/Swift_Programming_Language/Generics.html

Get notified when element added/removed to array

I wanted to be notified when an element added/removed from an array. If we are not talking about arrays, for example to be notified when a string is changed, there is a good solution in swift:
private var privateWord: String?
var word: String? {
get {
return privateWord
}
set {
if newValue != "" {
notifyThatWordIsChanged()
} else {
notifyThatWordIsEmpty()
}
privateWord = newValue
}
}
Can we achive a similar result, when I add/remove an element to an array?
You can create proxy like class/struct that will have same interface as array, will store standard array under the scenes and will act on behalf of store array. Here is small example:
struct ArrayProxy<T> {
var array: [T] = []
mutating func append(newElement: T) {
self.array.append(newElement)
print("Element added")
}
mutating func removeAtIndex(index: Int) {
print("Removed object \(self.array[index]) at index \(index)")
self.array.removeAtIndex(index)
}
subscript(index: Int) -> T {
set {
print("Set object from \(self.array[index]) to \(newValue) at index \(index)")
self.array[index] = newValue
}
get {
return self.array[index]
}
}
}
var a = ArrayProxy<Int>()
a.append(1)

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!)
}
}
}

Extending a Swift Array to replicate indexOfObject function

I have been trying to implement an iOS app in Swift from Big Nerd Ranch's most recent iOS book.
In the guide, there is the following method, where privateItems is an NSMutableArray
- (void)removeItem:(BNRItem *)item
{
[self.privateItems removeObjectIdenticalTo:item]
}
So in my Swift implementation, which has privateItems as a Swift Array, I would like to be able to do this:
func removeItem(item: Item) {
_privateItems.removeObjectIndenticalTo(item)
}
However, the Swift Array does not support that method. It has the removeAtIndex method. I know that I could simply achieve the same effect with the following code:
func removeItem(item: Item) {
for (index, element) in enumerate(_privateItems) {
if element === item {
_privateItems.removeAtIndex(index)
}
}
}
However, I would like to create a generic extension for the Swift Array so that I don't have to do this every time. Not a huge deal, but I think it would at least be good for the sake of learning.
I have looked into a couple of other SO posts (How can I extend typed Arrays in Swift? and How can we create a generic Array Extension that sums Number types in Swift?), but have not been able to accomplish what I want. Here is my attempt:
protocol Identifiable {
func ===(lhs: Self, rhs: Self) -> Self
}
extension Array {
func removeObjectIndenticalTo<T: Identifiable>(object: T) {
for (index, element) in enumerate(self) {
if object === element {
removeAtIndex(index)
}
}
}
}
I think I am pretty close. This gives the error "Could not find an overload for '===' that accepts the supplied arguments". What should I change to accomplish that?
Also for reference, there was another SO post that extended the Swift Array with some of the NSMutableArray methods in the following fashion:
extension Array {
func contains(#object:AnyObject) -> Bool {
return self.bridgeToObjectiveC().containsObject(object)
}
func indexOf(#object:AnyObject) -> Int {
return self.bridgeToObjectiveC().indexOfObject(object)
}
}
protocol Identifiable {
#infix func ===(a: Self, b: Self) -> Bool
}
struct Item : Identifiable {
var n : Int
}
#infix func ===(a: Item, b: Item) -> Bool {
return a.n == b.n
}
var _privateItems = [Item(n:1),Item(n:2),Item(n:2),Item(n:1),Item(n:2)]
func removeItem(item: Item) {
var tbr : Int[] = []
for (index, element) in enumerate(_privateItems) {
if element === item {
tbr += index
}
}
for i in reverse(sort(tbr)) {
_privateItems.removeAtIndex(i)
}
}
removeItem(Item(n:2))
println(_privateItems.count)
removeItem(Item(n:1))
println(_privateItems.count)

Resources