Revisions to How do I tokenize a string in C++?

replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/

Source Link

edited May 23, 2017 at 11:47

URL Rewriter Bot

No offense folks, but for such a simple problem, you are making things way too complicated. There are a lot of reasons to use Boost. But for something this simple, it's like hitting a fly with a 20# sledge.

void
split( vector<string> & theStringVector,  /* Altered/returned value */
       const  string  & theString,
       const  string  & theDelimiter)
{
    UASSERT( theDelimiter.size(), >, 0); // My own ASSERT macro.

    size_t  start = 0, end = 0;

    while ( end != string::npos)
    {
        end = theString.find( theDelimiter, start);

        // If at end, use length=maxLength.  Else use length=end-start.
        theStringVector.push_back( theString.substr( start,
                       (end == string::npos) ? string::npos : end - start));

        // If at end, use start=maxSize.  Else use start=end+delimiter.
        start = (   ( end > (string::npos - theDelimiter.size()) )
                  ?  string::npos  :  end + theDelimiter.size());
    }
}

For example (for Doug's case),

#define SHOW(I,X)   cout << "[" << (I) << "]\t " # X " = \"" << (X) << "\"" << endl

int
main()
{
    vector<string> v;

    split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

    for (unsigned int i = 0;  i < v.size();   i++)
        SHOW( i, v[i] );
}

And yes, we could have split() return a new vector rather than passing one in. It's trivial to wrap and overload. But depending on what I'm doing, I often find it better to re-use pre-existing objects rather than always creating new ones. (Just as long as I don't forget to empty the vector in between!)

Reference: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/.

(I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed)C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed). But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.)

No offense folks, but for such a simple problem, you are making things way too complicated. There are a lot of reasons to use Boost. But for something this simple, it's like hitting a fly with a 20# sledge.

void
split( vector<string> & theStringVector,  /* Altered/returned value */
       const  string  & theString,
       const  string  & theDelimiter)
{
    UASSERT( theDelimiter.size(), >, 0); // My own ASSERT macro.

    size_t  start = 0, end = 0;

    while ( end != string::npos)
    {
        end = theString.find( theDelimiter, start);

        // If at end, use length=maxLength.  Else use length=end-start.
        theStringVector.push_back( theString.substr( start,
                       (end == string::npos) ? string::npos : end - start));

        // If at end, use start=maxSize.  Else use start=end+delimiter.
        start = (   ( end > (string::npos - theDelimiter.size()) )
                  ?  string::npos  :  end + theDelimiter.size());
    }
}

For example (for Doug's case),

#define SHOW(I,X)   cout << "[" << (I) << "]\t " # X " = \"" << (X) << "\"" << endl

int
main()
{
    vector<string> v;

    split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

    for (unsigned int i = 0;  i < v.size();   i++)
        SHOW( i, v[i] );
}

And yes, we could have split() return a new vector rather than passing one in. It's trivial to wrap and overload. But depending on what I'm doing, I often find it better to re-use pre-existing objects rather than always creating new ones. (Just as long as I don't forget to empty the vector in between!)

Reference: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/.

(I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed). But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.)

No offense folks, but for such a simple problem, you are making things way too complicated. There are a lot of reasons to use Boost. But for something this simple, it's like hitting a fly with a 20# sledge.

void
split( vector<string> & theStringVector,  /* Altered/returned value */
       const  string  & theString,
       const  string  & theDelimiter)
{
    UASSERT( theDelimiter.size(), >, 0); // My own ASSERT macro.

    size_t  start = 0, end = 0;

    while ( end != string::npos)
    {
        end = theString.find( theDelimiter, start);

        // If at end, use length=maxLength.  Else use length=end-start.
        theStringVector.push_back( theString.substr( start,
                       (end == string::npos) ? string::npos : end - start));

        // If at end, use start=maxSize.  Else use start=end+delimiter.
        start = (   ( end > (string::npos - theDelimiter.size()) )
                  ?  string::npos  :  end + theDelimiter.size());
    }
}

For example (for Doug's case),

#define SHOW(I,X)   cout << "[" << (I) << "]\t " # X " = \"" << (X) << "\"" << endl

int
main()
{
    vector<string> v;

    split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

    for (unsigned int i = 0;  i < v.size();   i++)
        SHOW( i, v[i] );
}

And yes, we could have split() return a new vector rather than passing one in. It's trivial to wrap and overload. But depending on what I'm doing, I often find it better to re-use pre-existing objects rather than always creating new ones. (Just as long as I don't forget to empty the vector in between!)

Reference: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/.

(I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed). But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.)

use a better reference (see http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/194788)

Source Link

edited Sep 6, 2013 at 12:40

user283145

No offense folks, but for such a simple problem, you are making things way too complicated. There are a lot of reasons to use Boost. But for something this simple, it's like hitting a fly with a 20# sledge.

void
split( vector<string> & theStringVector,  /* Altered/returned value */
       const  string  & theString,
       const  string  & theDelimiter)
{
    UASSERT( theDelimiter.size(), >, 0); // My own ASSERT macro.

    size_t  start = 0, end = 0;

    while ( end != string::npos)
    {
        end = theString.find( theDelimiter, start);

        // If at end, use length=maxLength.  Else use length=end-start.
        theStringVector.push_back( theString.substr( start,
                       (end == string::npos) ? string::npos : end - start));

        // If at end, use start=maxSize.  Else use start=end+delimiter.
        start = (   ( end > (string::npos - theDelimiter.size()) )
                  ?  string::npos  :  end + theDelimiter.size());
    }
}

For example (for Doug's case),

#define SHOW(I,X)   cout << "[" << (I) << "]\t " # X " = \"" << (X) << "\"" << endl

int
main()
{
    vector<string> v;

    split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

    for (unsigned int i = 0;  i < v.size();   i++)
        SHOW( i, v[i] );
}

And yes, we could have split() return a new vector rather than passing one in. It's trivial to wrap and overload. But depending on what I'm doing, I often find it better to re-use pre-existing objects rather than always creating new ones. (Just as long as I don't forget to empty the vector in between!)

Reference: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/.

(I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed). But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.)

No offense folks, but for such a simple problem, you are making things way too complicated. There are a lot of reasons to use Boost. But for something this simple, it's like hitting a fly with a 20# sledge.

void
split( vector<string> & theStringVector,  /* Altered/returned value */
       const  string  & theString,
       const  string  & theDelimiter)
{
    UASSERT( theDelimiter.size(), >, 0); // My own ASSERT macro.

    size_t  start = 0, end = 0;

    while ( end != string::npos)
    {
        end = theString.find( theDelimiter, start);

        // If at end, use length=maxLength.  Else use length=end-start.
        theStringVector.push_back( theString.substr( start,
                       (end == string::npos) ? string::npos : end - start));

        // If at end, use start=maxSize.  Else use start=end+delimiter.
        start = (   ( end > (string::npos - theDelimiter.size()) )
                  ?  string::npos  :  end + theDelimiter.size());
    }
}

For example (for Doug's case),

#define SHOW(I,X)   cout << "[" << (I) << "]\t " # X " = \"" << (X) << "\"" << endl

int
main()
{
    vector<string> v;

    split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

    for (unsigned int i = 0;  i < v.size();   i++)
        SHOW( i, v[i] );
}

And yes, we could have split() return a new vector rather than passing one in. It's trivial to wrap and overload. But depending on what I'm doing, I often find it better to re-use pre-existing objects rather than always creating new ones. (Just as long as I don't forget to empty the vector in between!)

Reference: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/.

(I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed). But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.)

No offense folks, but for such a simple problem, you are making things way too complicated. There are a lot of reasons to use Boost. But for something this simple, it's like hitting a fly with a 20# sledge.

void
split( vector<string> & theStringVector,  /* Altered/returned value */
       const  string  & theString,
       const  string  & theDelimiter)
{
    UASSERT( theDelimiter.size(), >, 0); // My own ASSERT macro.

    size_t  start = 0, end = 0;

    while ( end != string::npos)
    {
        end = theString.find( theDelimiter, start);

        // If at end, use length=maxLength.  Else use length=end-start.
        theStringVector.push_back( theString.substr( start,
                       (end == string::npos) ? string::npos : end - start));

        // If at end, use start=maxSize.  Else use start=end+delimiter.
        start = (   ( end > (string::npos - theDelimiter.size()) )
                  ?  string::npos  :  end + theDelimiter.size());
    }
}

For example (for Doug's case),

#define SHOW(I,X)   cout << "[" << (I) << "]\t " # X " = \"" << (X) << "\"" << endl

int
main()
{
    vector<string> v;

    split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

    for (unsigned int i = 0;  i < v.size();   i++)
        SHOW( i, v[i] );
}

And yes, we could have split() return a new vector rather than passing one in. It's trivial to wrap and overload. But depending on what I'm doing, I often find it better to re-use pre-existing objects rather than always creating new ones. (Just as long as I don't forget to empty the vector in between!)

Reference: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/.

(I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed). But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.)

Moved meta information to the end.

Source Link

edited Feb 27, 2012 at 16:13

Peter Mortensen

31.3k
22
109
132

I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed)

But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.

No offense folks, but for such a simple problem, you are making things way too complicated. ThereThere are a lot of reasons to use BOOSTBoost. ButBut for something this simple, it's like hitting a fly with a 20# sledge.

void
split( vector<string> & theStringVector,  /* Altered/returned value */
       const  string  & theString,
       const  string  & theDelimiter )
{
    UASSERT( theDelimiter.size(), >, 0 ); // My own ASSERT macro.

    size_t  start = 0, end = 0;

    while ( end != string::npos )
    {
        end = theString.find( theDelimiter, start );

        // If at end, use length=maxLength.  Else use length=end-start.
        theStringVector.push_back( theString.substr( start,
                       (end == string::npos) ? string::npos : end - start ) );

        // If at end, use start=maxSize.  Else use start=end+delimiter.
        start = (   ( end > (string::npos - theDelimiter.size()) )
                  ?  string::npos  :  end + theDelimiter.size()    );
    }
}

E.g.:For example (Forfor Doug's case.),

int
main()
{
  vector<string> v;

  split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

#define SHOW(I,X)   cout << "[" << (I) << "]\t " # X " = \"" << (X) << "\"" << endl 

int
main()
{
  for  vector<string> v;

    split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

    for (unsigned int i = 0;  i < v.size();   i++ )
        SHOW( i, v[i] );
}

And yes, we could have split() return a new vector rather than passing one in. It'sIt's trivial to wrap &and overload. ButBut depending on what I'm doing, I often find it better to re-use pre-existing objects rather than always creating new ones. (Just as long as I don't forget to empty the vector in between!)

Reference: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/.

(I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed). But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.)

I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed)

But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.

No offense folks, but for such a simple problem, you are making things way too complicated. There are a lot of reasons to use BOOST. But for something this simple, it's like hitting a fly with a 20# sledge.

void
split( vector<string> & theStringVector,  /* Altered/returned value */
       const  string  & theString,
       const  string  & theDelimiter )
{
  UASSERT( theDelimiter.size(), >, 0 ); // My own ASSERT macro.

  size_t  start = 0, end = 0;

  while ( end != string::npos )
  {
    end = theString.find( theDelimiter, start );

      // If at end, use length=maxLength.  Else use length=end-start.
    theStringVector.push_back( theString.substr( start,
                   (end == string::npos) ? string::npos : end - start ) );

      // If at end, use start=maxSize.  Else use start=end+delimiter.
    start = (   ( end > (string::npos - theDelimiter.size()) )
              ?  string::npos  :  end + theDelimiter.size()    );
  }
}

E.g.: (For Doug's case.)

int
main()
{
  vector<string> v;

  split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

#define SHOW(I,X)   cout << "[" << (I) << "]\t " # X " = \"" << (X) << "\"" << endl

  for( unsigned int i = 0;  i < v.size();   i++ )
    SHOW( i, v[i] );
}

And yes, we could have split() return a new vector rather than passing one in. It's trivial to wrap & overload. But depending on what I'm doing, I often find it better to re-use pre-existing objects rather than always creating new ones. (Just as long as I don't forget to empty the vector in between!)

Reference: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/

No offense folks, but for such a simple problem, you are making things way too complicated. There are a lot of reasons to use Boost. But for something this simple, it's like hitting a fly with a 20# sledge.

void
split( vector<string> & theStringVector,  /* Altered/returned value */
       const  string  & theString,
       const  string  & theDelimiter)
{
    UASSERT( theDelimiter.size(), >, 0); // My own ASSERT macro.

    size_t  start = 0, end = 0;

    while ( end != string::npos)
    {
        end = theString.find( theDelimiter, start);

        // If at end, use length=maxLength.  Else use length=end-start.
        theStringVector.push_back( theString.substr( start,
                       (end == string::npos) ? string::npos : end - start));

        // If at end, use start=maxSize.  Else use start=end+delimiter.
        start = (   ( end > (string::npos - theDelimiter.size()) )
                  ?  string::npos  :  end + theDelimiter.size());
    }
}

For example (for Doug's case),

#define SHOW(I,X)   cout << "[" << (I) << "]\t " # X " = \"" << (X) << "\"" << endl 

int
main()
{
    vector<string> v;

    split( v, "A:PEP:909:Inventory Item", ":" );

    for (unsigned int i = 0;  i < v.size();   i++)
        SHOW( i, v[i] );
}

And yes, we could have split() return a new vector rather than passing one in. It's trivial to wrap and overload. But depending on what I'm doing, I often find it better to re-use pre-existing objects rather than always creating new ones. (Just as long as I don't forget to empty the vector in between!)

Reference: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/.

(I was originally writing a response to Doug's question: C++ Strings Modifying and Extracting based on Separators (closed). But since Martin York closed that question with a pointer over here... I'll just generalize my code.)

Source Link

created Nov 28, 2008 at 2:55

Mr.Ree

8.4k
28
30

Loading

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Return to Answer