Comment On The Quadrasort

dshiznit:

First!

dshiznit:

dshiznit:

First!

Sorry. I was just so frickin excited to see there were no posts yet!

Anonymous:

Ah! I see the WTF - he's using a Vector...

Alex Papadimoulis:

    String filesArray[] = new String[len];

    for (i = 0; i < len; i++)

      filesArray[i] = (String) filesVector.get(i);

Anonymous:

Ah! I see the WTF - he's using a Vector...

Ytram:

dshiznit:

dshiznit:

First!

Sorry. I was just so frickin excited to see there were no posts yet!

I fully endorse the genocide of people like yourself that get excited by being the first to post, or think that such an accomplishment is worthy of any kind of kudos or acknowledgement.

kipthegreat:

At least in Java 5 code like this is no longer needed (just the snippet here, not whole wtf). I've had to do it several times and always found it a little annoying.

Now (assuming filesVector is defined as Vector), all that can be replaced with-

String[] filesArray = filesVector.toArray();

or something like that, I forget exact syntax

Djinn:

ugh. Meant to quote Ytram. The "edit time" timed out.

I've cleaned up behind so many "programmers" afraid or ignorant of recursion. And so many DIY-ers. This is a bad combonation of the two.

Ytram:

dshiznit:

dshiznit:

First!

Sorry. I was just so frickin excited to see there were no posts yet!

I
fully endorse the genocide of people like yourself that get excited by
being the first to post, or think that such an accomplishment is worthy
of any kind of kudos or acknowledgement.

kipthegreat:

I also endorse the genocide of the
people who add another ten stupid posts saying "I hate people who post
'first'".  ...snip...  I will be remembered as a martyr!

Anonymous:

kipthegreat:

At least in Java 5 code like this is no longer needed (just the snippet here, not whole wtf). I've had to do it several times and always found it a little annoying.

Now (assuming filesVector is defined as Vector), all that can be replaced with-

String[] filesArray = filesVector.toArray();

or something like that, I forget exact syntax

Yet another Java programmer who doesn't know what he is talking about. Vector#toArray() is there since ancient Java 1.2. Particular the version were you supply your own array as an argument works like a charm since ages when you need to get a special type of array.

kipthegreat:

Anonymous:

kipthegreat:

At least in Java 5 code like this is no longer needed (just the snippet here, not whole wtf). I've had to do it several times and always found it a little annoying.

Now (assuming filesVector is defined as Vector), all that can be replaced with-

String[] filesArray = filesVector.toArray();

or something like that, I forget exact syntax

Yet another Java programmer who doesn't know what he is talking about. Vector#toArray() is there since ancient Java 1.2. Particular the version were you supply your own array as an argument works like a charm since ages when you need to get a special type of array.

Cool, I didn't realize that. I had tried casting the result to a special array   (String[])vector.toArray() ... which obviously doesn't work since Object[] can't be casted to String[].  I guess I stopped there since a loop was simple and I didn't catch that the one with the parameter would correctly handle a String[] argument.

At least I know I'm not the only one that doesn't know this..  I've seen a loop like this in other people's code many times, but I've never seen the toArray(Object[]) method used.

RevMike:

The first time I tried to use this method, I struggled to get the syntax correct.  Here is an example to keep handy...

import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.Vector;

public class ToArrayDemo {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Collection c = new Vector();
       
        c.add("Foo");
        c.add("Bar");
        c.add("Baz");

        String[] a = (String[]) c.toArray(new String[]{});

        for (int i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
            System.out.println(a[i]);
        }
    }
}

        Collection c = new Vector();

        c.add("Foo");
        c.add("Bar");
        c.add("Baz");

        String[] a = new String[c.size()];

        c.toArray(a);

        for (int i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
             System.out.println(a[i]);
        }

String filesArray[] = new String[len];
    for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
      filesArray[i] = (String) filesVector.get(i);

	String filesArray[] = new String[len];
	filesVector.toArray(filesArray);

Heh, I see. Year has four characters to it, so how can this possibly work? And Month and Day and HH have 2 a piece. This calls for my patented decasort(), with 10 while loops. It's 150% better than quadrasort!

No wait, don't you have to bubblesort each bit separately? What's 80 in Latin?

No wait, is this Unicode?

--Rank

TankerJoe:

RevMike:

The first time I tried to use this method, I struggled to get the syntax correct.  Here is an example to keep handy...

import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.Vector;

public class ToArrayDemo {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Collection c = new Vector();
       
        c.add("Foo");
        c.add("Bar");
        c.add("Baz");

        String[] a = (String[]) c.toArray(new String[]{});

        for (int i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
            System.out.println(a[i]);
        }
    }
}

I agree that it is far from intuitive to use this method as I
originally struggled with it also.  I came up with a slightly
different take that works fine, and I think is a little bit clearer.

        Collection c = new Vector();

        c.add("Foo");
        c.add("Bar");
        c.add("Baz");

        String[] a = new String[c.size()];

        c.toArray(a);

        for (int i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
             System.out.println(a[i]);
        }

So, to bring it back to the WTF, this:

String filesArray[] = new String[len];
    for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
      filesArray[i] = (String) filesVector.get(i);

Could have easily been done like this, no loopy looping needed:

	String filesArray[] = new String[len];
	filesVector.toArray(filesArray);

whoisfred:

Personally, I prefer this:
        String[] a = (String[]) c.toArray(new String[c.size]);

All one line without having to create an extraneous empty String array.

whoisfred:

whoisfred:

Personally, I prefer this:
        String[] a = (String[]) c.toArray(new String[c.size]);

All one line without having to create an extraneous empty String array.

of course I meant:

        String[] a = (String[]) c.toArray(new String[c.size()]);

TankerJoe:

	String[] a = new String[c.size()];
        c.toArray(a);

Alex Papadimoulis:

try {
countYearA = Integer.parseInt(valA.substring(0, 4));
countYearB = Integer.parseInt(valB.substring(0, 4));
countA = Integer.parseInt(valA.substring(4, 6));
countB = Integer.parseInt(valB.substring(4, 6));
if (countYearA < countYearB)
continue;
if (countA <= countB)
continue;
filesArray[i] = valB;
filesArray[i + 1] = valA;
} catch (NumberFormatException nfe) {
Log.log( ERROR1+nfe.getMessage() , NPSLOGGER );
}

Anonymous:

Atleast he is doing exception handling...

Nand:

Anonymous:

Ah! I see the WTF - he's using a Vector...

Of course. Vector fileVector. This is obviously a vector of files... no wait. Strings.

/not like naming it filenameVector would make the function justifyable..

"What's your vector, Victor?"

dunno why, but I just thought of something..

For all the developers that talk about genocide of dumb developers, I wonder if any of you guys are the ones that are making these types of manslaughter to coding.  It was definitely off topic, but yeah. 

TankerJoe:

whoisfred:

whoisfred:

Personally, I prefer this:
        String[] a = (String[]) c.toArray(new String[c.size]);

All one line without having to create an extraneous empty String array.

of course I meant:

        String[] a = (String[]) c.toArray(new String[c.size()]);

TankerJoe:

	String[] a = new String[c.size()];
        c.toArray(a);

I see/agree with the "all-on-one-line" argument,but  where is my
extraneous empty String array?  I'm pretty sure that both way are:



1) Creating a string array with the exact capacity needed to fill it with the String objects in the collection

2) Fill up the String array

3) Keep a reference to the String array ... called "a" in this case.



The only difference is that I keep the reference from when I created
the array, whereas you get the reference by casting the return object
from the toArray method.  Maybe we can chalk this up to programmer
preference/style?  Programming is an art form after all.

whoisfred:

whoisfred:

Personally, I prefer this:
        String[] a = (String[]) c.toArray(new String[c.size]);

All one line without having to create an extraneous empty String array.

of course I meant:

        String[] a = (String[]) c.toArray(new String[c.size()]);

Noah:

I was thinking a randomized algorithm would work