Solved

Split a string: needed efficient algoritme

Posted on 1998-06-07
5
139 Views
Last Modified: 2012-05-07
Having no time to do this myself right now,
I would like to have the following slow code modified so that it becomes
much, much quicker.
Function Reserve can go away, but the procedure SplitFromEnd must give the exact same result as it does know.
The typical length of the string to process in SplitFromEnd is about 20 Kb.
So Reserve is very very inefficient.
Please post your answer ASAP, and in the form of a procedure I can cut and paste
in my program right away and do not give mere hints.

With Regards,
 Donker


Function Reverse(Inputstring: String): String;
var x : integer;
    ToProcess : String;
begin
    ToProcess:='';
    for x:= 1 to length(Inputstring)
    do ToProcess:= copy(Inputstring,x,1) + ToProcess;
    Reverse:=ToProcess;

end;

procedure SplitFromEnd(SplitAt: String; var InputString, PostString: String) ;
var TmpPos: integer;
    Before, AfterIncl, ToProcess: String;
    tmpSplitAt: string;
begin
   ToProcess:=Reverse(Inputstring);
   tmpSplitAt:=Reverse(SplitAt);

   TmpPos := pos(tmpSplitAt, ToProcess);

   if tmppos = 0
   then begin
        MessageDlg('SplitFromEnd: NOT FOUND', mtInformation,[mbOk], 0);
        end;

   AfterIncl:= copy(ToProcess, 1, tmppos + length(SplitAt));
   AfterIncl:=reverse(AfterIncl);
   Before :=  copy(ToProcess, tmppos +length(SplitAt), length(ToProcess));
   Before := reverse(Before);

   InputString:=Before;
   Poststring:= AfterIncl;
end;
0
Comment
Question by:padonker
5 Comments
 
LVL 5

Accepted Solution

by:
inter earned 350 total points
ID: 1334779
Hi friend,
This routine does no reversion and it only do one copy operation. May be it full fill you needs.

procedure SplitFromEnd(SplitAt: string; var InStr, PostStr: string);
var
  P : PChar;
  C : PChar;
  CLen : integer;
  Found : boolean;
begin
  // Append #0 for null terminated processing
  C := @SplitAt[1];
  CLen := Length(SplitAt);
  P := @InStr[Length(InStr) - Length(SplitAt)];
  SplitAt := SplitAt + #0;
  // try to find the SplitAt from right
  Found := false;
  while (P <> @InStr[1]) and not Found do  //while not hit to the begining
  begin
    Dec(P);
    Found := StrLComp(P, C, CLen) = 0;
  end;
  if Found then
  begin
    //copy post
    PostStr := StrPas(P);
    //Truncate the InStr
    SetLength(InStr, Longint(P) - Longint(@InStr[1]));
  end else
    MessageDlg('SplitFromEnd: NOT FOUND', mtInformation, [mbOk], 0);
end;

Awaiting comments
Regards,
Igor
0
 
LVL 5

Expert Comment

by:ronit051397
ID: 1334780
Maybe this Reverse function will work faster:

Function Reverse(Inputstring: String): String;
var P,S: pChar;
begin
  S:=pChar(Inputstring);
  P:=StrEnd(S)-1;
  Dec(S);
  while P<>S do
  begin
    Result:=Result+P[0];
    Dec(P);
  end;
end;
0
 

Author Comment

by:padonker
ID: 1334781
I say: Yes, this is a excellent piece of code.
Thank you Inter.



With regards,
   Donker
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Holger101497
ID: 1334782
I guess inter's function will be the fastest... although it does 20000 string compares if the string is 20000 long... I don't know the internal implementation of POS, so I don't know how fast it is...

some hints about your code:
copy(Inputstring,x,1) is InputString[x] ! I don't know how "smart" the compiler is in optimization, but you definitely don't need a function call here! InputString[x] is (almost) directly translated into an address


ronit: Your code will only be marginally faster - if at all.
The problem is this: for x:= 1 to length(Inputstring) do ToProcess:= copy(Inputstring,x,1) + ToProcess; OR Result:=Result+P[0];

They both append the characters one by one and re-allocate the string 20000 times! The "correct" way of reversing it would be something like this:

L:=Length(InputString); //store it to save 20000 function calls in the loop
SetLength(result,L); //allocate the string;
FOR P:=1 TO L DO result[L]:=InputString[L+1-P];

you can use PChars, but I'm not sure if that's faster...

P.S.: Ooops. While I was writing, the answer was accepted. I wonder if my comment still makes it :-))
0
 
LVL 5

Expert Comment

by:inter
ID: 1334783
Thanks,
If you need a faster routine I can program a FindLast routine which immediatelly finds the right most matching string and we can get rid of the StrLComp, but this may take a while. Regards, Igor
0

Featured Post

Live: Real-Time Solutions, Start Here

Receive instant 1:1 support from technology experts, using our real-time conversation and whiteboard interface. Your first 5 minutes are always free.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Suggested Solutions

Title # Comments Views Activity
code issue 8 127
Making delphi communicate with a c# service 16 102
how to update exe applicatio from internet ? 6 76
Firemonkey webbrowser scrollbars ? 1 37
Objective: - This article will help user in how to convert their numeric value become words. How to use 1. You can copy this code in your Unit as function 2. than you can perform your function by type this code The Code   (CODE) The Im…
In my programming career I have only very rarely run into situations where operator overloading would be of any use in my work.  Normally those situations involved math with either overly large numbers (hundreds of thousands of digits or accuracy re…
This Micro Tutorial demonstrates using Microsoft Excel pivot tables, how to reverse engineer competitors' marketing strategies through backlinks.
Email security requires an ever evolving service that stays up to date with counter-evolving threats. The Email Laundry perform Research and Development to ensure their email security service evolves faster than cyber criminals. We apply our Threat…

813 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question

Need Help in Real-Time?

Connect with top rated Experts

18 Experts available now in Live!

Get 1:1 Help Now