Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
It's not an actual problem but it is frustrating me..
I was looking for a better way to right an IF statement with multiple values that can be accepted.
For example:
if ([[myJson objectForKey:#"pages"] intValue] == 0 || [[myJson objectForKey:#"pages"] intValue] == 3)
Isn't there any way to write something like:
if ([[myJson objectForKey:#"pages"] intValue] == 0 | 3)
{
}
Thanks !!
No, not really. You could do this:
int pages = [[myJson objectForKey:#"pages"] intValue];
if (pages == 0 || pages == 3)
That's what I would recommend. The code you posted is both less efficient and harder to maintain than the code I show.
In your code you actually invoke the objectForKey and intValue methods twice on the same object.
Plus if at some point in the future you change the key value, or the variable name, you have to make the same edit in 2 places, which is more work and adds another chance to introduce a new copy/paste error.
In addition to the other valid answers, you could use a switch:
int numberOfPages = [[myJson objectForKey:#"pages"] intValue];
switch (numberOfPages) {
case 0:
case 3: {
NSLog(#"Is 0 or 3");
break;
}
default: {
NSLog(#"Is NOT 0 or 3");
break;
}
}
This is a much better method as it is clean and easier to read:
int x = [[myJson objectForKey:#"pages"] intValue];
if (x == 0 || x == 3) {
}
You are highly optimistic there.
If myJson is not an NSDictionary your app will crash.
If myJson[#"pages"] is not an NSNumber then your app will crash.
If myJson[#"pages"] does not exist then intValue will return 0.
If myJson[#"pages"] has a value of 0.9 or 3.7 then intValue will return 0 or 3.
I suggest you add a category to NSDictionary with a method like integerValueForKey: withDefault where you lookup an item, check that it is an NSNumber with an integer value, return that value or return the default value.
As David Rönnqvist pointed out, it is mostly a matter of preference. I would personally go with NSArray containing allowed values. This way you won't clutter your code with unnecessary intValue calls. Also adding another allowed value will only require adding a single value to an array instead of adding another condition inside if statement.
Note that you can use Objective-C literal syntax to make the code more concise.
NSArray *allowedValues = #[#0, #3];
if([allowedValues containsObject:myJson[#"pages"]]) {
}
If [myJson objectForKey:#"pages"] is an NSNumber. You could do this:
if([#[#0, #3] containsObject:[myJson objectForKey:#"pages"]])
And if myJson is an NSDictionary you could even shorten it to:
if([#[#0, #3] containsObject:myJson[#"pages"]])
It's not necessarily optimal, but it does provide you with a lot more flexibility when adding more values to check against, which it sounds like you're looking for as opposed to the fastest code. If you're just checking a few values I'm assuming speed of execution is not an issue.
Side note: this works because NSArray's containsObject: method calls isEqual: on every object. NSNumber's isEqualToNumber: gets called. This will also work with NSString instead of NSNumber if that's what you're working with. Just change the search array to hold NSString objects in that case.
Related
This question already has answers here:
Should you use 'isEqual' or '=='?
(2 answers)
Comparing objects in Obj-C
(4 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
I am reading the Programming with Objective-C . In the section of Determining Equality of Objects , it says the following words:
- When dealing with objects, the == operator is used to test whether two separate pointers are pointing to the same object:
if (firstPerson == secondPerson) {
// firstPerson is the same object as secondPerson
}
- If you need to test whether two objects represent the same data, you need to call a method like isEqual:, available from NSObject:
if ([firstPerson isEqual:secondPerson]) {
// firstPerson is identical to secondPerson
}
I get confused about the differences between == and isEqual with the above explanation, does it mean firstPerson == secondPerson is an alternative of [firstPerson isEqual:secondPerson] ?
The definition of == is correct, it checks to see that they're pointing to the actual same pointer/memory address (ie. 0xffffff)
The key to understanding what you're asking is to think about what you mean by the word "equal". "equal" typically means, from the developer's point of view, that "these two objects contain the same data in the fields that I require for all practical purposes". You can have two user objects each with the same userID property but different times in lastUpdated - would you consider them equal? Depends on your use case. Most likely you would say yes because they're the same user. They were updated from the server at different times, so some fields differ, but for your implementation, they're equal.
In the case above, are they the same object? Definitely not. They point to different memory addresses. So == would be NO, whereas if you wrote your isEqual: method to check just the userID property, it would return YES
The definition of isEqual: is entirely up to the author of the class. isEqual: can be written to use == if you wanted. All you have to do, in your class, is to override the isEqual: method which is defined by the NSObject protocol.
If you have a custom object, use isEqual: to define what your definition of equal is. In the example of a user object, you might define:
- (BOOL)isEqual:(id)otherObject {
if ([otherObject isKindOfClass:[self class]]) {
MyClass *otherObjectAfterCast = (MyClass*)otherObject;
if ([otherObjectAfterCast.userID isEqualToString:self.userID])
return YES;
}
return NO;
}
Technically you'd probably want to use caseInsensitiveCompare: or something like that but you get the drift...
isEqual: can also be used to trigger other methods - in the case of NSString - calling isEqual: when both operands are strings results in a call to isEqualToString: - which is why the documentation recommends calling isEqualToString: if you know they're both strings, since it's a bit faster.
So, isEqual: is whatever you make of it, or whatever the class author has defined it to be.
This is also a pretty clear definition in the docs (for once lol): NSObject Protocol Reference
Hope this helps! Let me know if you need any further clarification.
NSString *string1 = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"some string"];
NSString *string2 = [[NSString alloc] initWithString:#"some string"];
NSString *string3 = string2;
BOOL equal1 = (string1 == string2); // NO
BOOL equal2 = [string1 isEqual:string2]; // YES
BOOL equal3 = (string2 == string3); // YES
BOOL equal4 = [string2 isEqualToString:string3]; // YES
The simple version is this.
== tells you if the pointers are the same object or not.
The isEqual: family of methods do something different.
They tell you if the objects at the other end of the pointers are effectively the same based on some criteria such as the properties or ivars holding equal values or whatever logic is implemented in the method used. They may or may not be the exact same object.
Closed. This question is not reproducible or was caused by typos. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question was caused by a typo or a problem that can no longer be reproduced. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a way less likely to help future readers.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Simple one.
I'm using indexOfObject to check if a value is already in an array.
If the value isn't in the array indexOfObject returns the constant NSNotFound.
Why does comparison with > 100000 work:
NSInteger indexOfCell = [_selectedCellIndices indexOfObject:cellIndex];
if(indexOfCell > 1000000)
but equality with NSNotFound fail:
NSInteger indexOfCell = [_selectedCellIndices indexOfObject:cellIndex];
if(indexOfCell == NSNotFound)
2147483647 is NSNotFound (also known, under certain circumstanced, as -1). There is something wrong with how you are testing whether your test succeeds or fails, because Cocoa itself is behaving exactly as advertised.
NSInteger indexOfCell = [[NSArray new] indexOfObject:#""];
NSLog(#"%d", indexOfCell); // some number
NSLog(#"%d", NSNotFound); // the same number
NSLog(#"%d", indexOfCell == NSNotFound); // 1, i.e. YES
Try it yourself.
you could use the ContainsObject: method. Might be easier.
indexOfObject is suppose to be NSUInteger (unsigned) not NSInteger. That is probably screwing up your comparison. Try changing the type to NSUInteger and trying again.
I have an array full of NSObjects I created called "Questions".
One property of each Question is which level it belongs to.
If the user has chosen to play level 2, I want to get all the Questions that have a .level property of 2. Right now I am looping through all the questions to find the matches, but this is taking ~2 seconds on an iPad 3 / new iPad device. Is there a faster way of dealing with a situation like this?
int goThrough = 0;
do {
Question *currentQuestion = [allQs objectAtIndex:(goThrough)];
if (currentQuestion.level == levelChosen) {
[questions addObject:currentQuestion];
}
goThrough++;
} while (goThrough < [allQs count]);
Your help is greatly appreciated!
If you have to organize the questions by level on a regular basis, then why not keep all of the questions organized by level. Create a dictionary of arrays. Each key if the level and each array is the list of questions for that level. You do this once and it becomes trivial to get the questions for a level.
I dont have access to a mac at the moment but you can give a try to this:
[allQs enumerateObjectsWithOptions:NSEnumerationConcurrent usingBlock:^(id obj, NSUInteger index, BOOL *stop) {
Question *currentQuestion = [allQs objectAtIndex:index];
if (currentQuestion.level == levelChosen) {
[questions addObject:currentQuestion];
}
}
This will use all the cores of your device so it can be twice as fast
You could always use fast enumeration (which, unless you intend on mutating the objects is the fastest way to enumerate a collection). Something like this:
for (Question *thisQuestion in allQs) {
if (thisQuestion.level == levelChosen)
[questions addObject:thisQuestion];
}
}
Since you are not mutating the collection you are iterating through (allQs), this would work fine and be faster than using enumerateObjectsUsingBlock. If you need the index of the array you are iterating through (allQs), then use enumerateObjectsUsingBlock.
I would suggest using the NSArray method enumerateObjectsUsingBlock or one of it's variants. There are even variants that will loop through the array elements concurrently. You'd probably need to use a lock to add elements to your questions array however, since I doubt if NSMutableArray's addObject method is thread-safe.
You should probably test a non-concurrent version against a concurrent version with locking to see which is faster. Which approach is faster would depend on how many of the objects in the allQs array belong to the current level. If only a few belong, the code that asserts a lock won't fire very often, and the benefit of concurrency will outweigh the time penalty of asserting a lock. If most of the objects in the allQs array match the chosen level, code will end up spending a lot of time asserting locks, and the concurrent threads will still waiting for other threads to release a lock.
Modified code might look something like this:
single-threaded version:
[allQs enumerateObjectsUsingBlock:
^(Question *currentQuestion, NSUInteger index, BOOL *stop)
{
if (currentQuestion.level == levelChosen)
[questions addObject:currentQuestion];
}
];
Concurrent version:
[allQs enumerateObjectsWithOptions:
NSEnumerationConcurrent
usingBlock:
^(Question *currentQuestion, NSUInteger index, BOOL *stop)
{
if (currentQuestion.level == levelChosen)
#synchronized
{
[questions addObject:currentQuestion];
}
}
];
Actually, now that I think about it, you would likely get still faster performance by first doing a concurrent pass on the array using indexesOfObjectsWithOptions:passingTest. In that pass you'd build an NSIndexSet of all the objects that match the current level. Then in one pass you'd extract those elements into another array:
NSIndexSet *questionIndexes = [allQs indexesOfObjectsWithOptions: NSEnumerationConcurrent
usingBlock:
^(Question *currentQuestion, NSUInteger index, BOOL *stop)
{
return (currentQuestion.level == levelChosen)
}
];
questions = [allQs objectsAtIndexes: questionIndexes];
Another poster pointed out that you are better off breaking up your arrays of questions up by level in advance. If that works with your program flow it's better, since not filtering your array at all will always be faster than the most highly optimized filtering code.
There is a simple answer that seems to be missing. If you want to filter the objects of an array to only have certain ones left, -filteredArrayUsingPredicate: is what you would want. It can be done exceptionally simply.
NSPredicate *p = [NSPredicate predicateWithBlock:^(Question *aQuestion, NSDictionary *bindings){
return (aQuestion.level==2);
}];
NSArray *filteredArray = [originalArray filteredArrayUsingPredicate:p];
This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.
Closed 9 years ago.
here i am stuck with the following chunk of code
self.isFiltered?[self.filteredCategories count]:[self.categories count]
here isFiltered is an bool, filteredCategories is a mutable array, categories is an array. This line return an integer. I don't understand what and how this line is working. Thanks
That's a ternary statement. Say you have an if like this:
if (condition)
var = one thing
else
var = other thing
As a ternary, that would be
var = condition ? one thing : other thing
So, in your case, it will set your variable to the filter count if filtered, or to the full category count if unfiltered.
It's the same to:
int someVariable = 0;
if(self.isFiltered) {
someVariable = [self.filteredCategories count];
} else {
someVariable = [self.categories count];
}
In your code it's just another form.
Well it's not that hard, it's an "advanced" version of an if/else. It says that if the variable isFiltered is set to YES, it will return the number of elements in the filteredCategories array, but if it is set to NO it will return the number of elements in categories.
You can use a normal if-else to simplify things. When in doubt, go with the standard if-else syntax
if(self.isFiltered){
[self.filteredCategories count]
}
else{
[self.categories count]
}
I have a NSString that's giving out input values on a control.
I want to take these values and convert them for user display. AKA, Value 0.7 is 1, value 1.3 is 5. etc.
Ive tried writing an if statement, such as
if self.label.text = 0.7
self.labelone.text = 1
But I cant figure out where it should be written or what code I should be using.
I only need 6 values so even though its a messy way to implement it, I dont mind that much.
Ive searched many resources and I cannot find anything or anyone trying to attempt something similar, which leads me to believe its either incredibly simple, or I'm missing out on something incredibly simple.
Here is the code for the UILabel I'm trying to convert and modify
- (IBAction)rotaryKnobDidChange
{
self.label.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%.3f", self.rotaryKnob.value];
self.slider.value = self.rotaryKnob.value;
}
To compare two variables you should use == instead of =. And you're trying to compare CGFloats with NSStrings.
Use something like this:
if([yourLable.text isEqualToString: #"0.7"]){
[otherLable setText: #"1"];
} else {
if ([yourLable.text isEqualToString: #"1.3"]){
[otherLable setText: #"5"];
}
}
The simple answer to your question:
if ([self.label.text isEqualToString:#"0.7"])
self.labelone.text = #"1";
else if ([self.label.text isEqualToString:#"1.3"])
self.labelone.text = #"5";
But I don't think this is really the code you want.