I answered a question here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/28862668/2642059 Where I needed to use recurrence to step through a string
. I wanted to use a const string&
as my parameter on each function, but unless I wanted to reconstruct the string each recursion I found that I needed to pass a start
and finish
position as well as the string
itself. So it became pointless to pass the string
at all.
In the end I choose to just pass a start
and finish
pointer to the char[]
.
As an example, say that I'm given a string which contains nested parenthesis (but no side by side parenthetical insertions.) So like this:
(abc(def(ghi((j)klm)nop)qrs)tuv)wxyz
But not like this:
(abc(def)(ghi)(j)(klm)(nop)(qrs)tuv)wxyz
I want to write a recursive program to extract the string in the deepest nested parentheses. Something like:
string foo(const string& bar){
auto start = bar.find('(') + 1;
return start == string::npos + 1 ? bar : foo(bar.substr(start, bar.find_last_of(')') - start));
}
However I'm unhappy reconstructing a string
for each recurrence of foo
. The alternative is to pass start
and finish
pointers as in the linked example (or to pass string::const_iterator
s.)
Is there a wrapper or something which would allow me to use string
functionality, but not reconstruct a string
?
string_view
from the library fundamentals TS might be one idea, support is available in GCC.
The interface is virtually identical to string
#include <experimental/string_view>
using std::experimental::string_view;
string_view foo(const string_view& bar){
auto start = bar.find('(') + 1;
return start == string_view::npos + 1 ? bar : foo(bar.substr(start, bar.find_last_of(')') - start));
}
The last line could also be
return start ? foo(bar.substr(start, bar.find_last_of(')') - start)) : bar;
Although they're both pretty cryptic.
Write your own array_view<T>
. It is a few dozen lines of code.
Use std::find
to replace both algorithms. In one case, use reverse iterators. (or write a range-based find and range-based backwards
)
Use {T*,T*}
ctor to recurse.
array_view<const char> foo(array_view<const char> bar)
Here is a primitive array_view<T>
:
template<class T>
struct array_view {
using mutable_T = typename std::remove_reference<T>::type;
// 3 primitive functions:
T* begin() const { return b; }
T* end() const { return e; }
array_view(T* s, T* f):b(s), e(f) {};
// everything else based on them:
size_t size() const { return end()-begin(); }
array_view(T* s, size_t l):array_view(s,s+l) {}
array_view():array_view(nullptr, nullptr) {}
// repeat next 3 for string, array, initializer list, C array as required:
template<class A>
array_view( std::vector<T,A>& v ):array_view(v.data(), v.size()) {}
// may not compile for non-const T, but that is ok you get an error:
template<class A>
array_view( std::vector<mutable_T,A>const & v ):array_view(v.data(), v.size()) {}
// in a better world, you'd SFINAE remove the above from consideration
// consider it for your next iteration of array_view.
// conversion to containers:
template<class A>
explicit operator std::vector<mutable_T,A>() const {
return convert_to< std::vector<mutable_T, A> >();
}
template<class C>
C convert_to() const {
C retval(begin(), end());
return retval;
}
// utility functions:
T& front() const { return *begin(); }
T& back() const { return std::prev(*end()); }
// Also rbegin, rend, and whatever else you find you are missing
// inspired by std::experimental:
void pop_front() { *this = {std::next(begin()), end()}; }
void pop_back() { *this = {begin(), std::prev(end())}; }
// but I find direct use of `view = {x,y}` almost as good
// these kind of operations are the ONLY ones that are non-const
// remember this is a view. If you want a view of const data, make it
// an array_view<const T>, not a const array_view<T>. It really works
// out better.
private:
T* b
T* e;
};
the above sample code is not tested.