I wonder if is there a good way to get the number of digits in right/left side of a decimal number PHP. For example:
12345.789 -> RIGHT SIDE LENGTH IS 3 / LEFT SIDE LENGTH IS 5
I know it is readily attainable by helping string functions and exploding the number. I mean is there a mathematically or programmatically way to perform it better than string manipulations.
Your answers would be greatly appreciated.
Update
The best solution for left side till now was:
$left = floor(log10($x))+1;
but still no sufficient for right side.
Still waiting ...
To get the digits on the left side you can do this:
$left = floor(log10($x))+1;
This uses the base 10 logarithm to get the number of digits.
The right side is harder. A simple approach would look like this, but due to floating point numbers, it would often fail:
$decimal = $x - floor($x);
$right = 0;
while (floor($decimal) != $decimal) {
$right++;
$decimal *= 10; //will bring in floating point 'noise' over time
}
This will loop through multiplying by 10 until there are no digits past the decimal. That is tested with floor($decimal) != $decimal.
However, as Ali points out, giving it the number 155.11 (a hard to represent digit in binary) results in a answer of 14. This is because as the number is stored as something like 155.11000000000001 with the 32 bits of floating precision we have.
So instead, a more robust solution is needed. (PoPoFibo's solutions above is particularly elegant, and uses PHPs inherit float comparison functions well).
The fact is, we can never distinguish between input of 155.11 and 155.11000000000001. We will never know which number was originally given. They will both be represented the same. However, if we define the number of zeroes that we can see in a row before we just decide the decimal is 'done' than we can come up with a solution:
$x = 155.11; //the number we are testing
$LIMIT = 10; //number of zeroes in a row until we say 'enough'
$right = 0; //number of digits we've checked
$empty = 0; //number of zeroes we've seen in a row
while (floor($x) != $x) {
$right++;
$base = floor($x); //so we can see what the next digit is;
$x *= 10;
$base *= 10;
$digit = floor($x) - $base; //the digit we are dealing with
if ($digit == 0) {
$empty += 1;
if ($empty == $LIMIT) {
$right -= $empty; //don't count all those zeroes
break; // exit the loop, we're done
}
} else {
$zeros = 0;
}
}
This should find the solution given the reasonable assumption that 10 zeroes in a row means any other digits just don't matter.
However, I still like PopoFibo's solution better, as without any multiplication, PHPs default comparison functions effectively do the same thing, without the messiness.
I am lost on PHP semantics big time but I guess the following would serve your purpose without the String usage (that is at least how I would do in Java but hopefully cleaner):
Working code here: http://ideone.com/7BnsR3
Non-string solution (only Math)
Left side is resolved hence taking the cue from your question update:
$value = 12343525.34541;
$left = floor(log10($value))+1;
echo($left);
$num = floatval($value);
$right = 0;
while($num != round($num, $right)) {
$right++;
}
echo($right);
Prints
85
8 for the LHS and 5 for the RHS.
Since I'm taking a floatval that would make 155.0 as 0 RHS which I think is valid and can be resolved by String functions.
php > $num = 12345.789;
php > $left = strlen(floor($num));
php > $right = strlen($num - floor($num));
php > echo "$left / $right\n";
5 / 16 <--- 16 digits, huh?
php > $parts = explode('.', $num);
php > var_dump($parts);
array(2) {
[0]=>
string(5) "12345"
[1]=>
string(3) "789"
As you can see, floats aren't the easiest to deal with... Doing it "mathematically" leads to bad results. Doing it by strings works, but makes you feel dirty.
$number = 12345.789;
list($whole, $fraction) = sscanf($number, "%d.%d");
This will always work, even if $number is an integer and you’ll get two real integers returned. Length is best done with strlen() even for integer values. The proposed log10() approach won't work for 10, 100, 1000, … as you might expect.
// 5 - 3
echo strlen($whole) , " - " , strlen($fraction);
If you really, really want to get the length without calling any string function here you go. But it's totally not efficient at all compared to strlen().
/**
* Get integer length.
*
* #param integer $integer
* The integer to count.
* #param boolean $count_zero [optional]
* Whether 0 is to be counted or not, defaults to FALSE.
* #return integer
* The integer's length.
*/
function get_int_length($integer, $count_zero = false) {
// 0 would be 1 in string mode! Highly depends on use case.
if ($count_zero === false && $integer === 0) {
return 0;
}
return floor(log10(abs($integer))) + 1;
}
// 5 - 3
echo get_int_length($whole) , " - " , get_int_length($fraction);
The above will correctly count the result of 1 / 3, but be aware that the precision is important.
$number = 1 / 3;
// Above code outputs
// string : 1 - 10
// math : 0 - 10
$number = bcdiv(1, 3);
// Above code outputs
// string : 1 - 0 <-- oops
// math : 0 - INF <-- 8-)
No problem there.
I would like to apply a simple logic.
<?php
$num=12345.789;
$num_str="".$num; // Converting number to string
$array=explode('.',$num_str); //Explode number (String) with .
echo "Left side length : ".intval(strlen($array[0])); // $array[0] contains left hand side then check the string length
echo "<br>";
if(sizeof($array)>1)
{
echo "Left side length : ".intval(strlen($array[1]));// $array[1] contains left hand check the string length side
}
?>
Is there a term for the idea of storing large numbers as letters? For example let's say I have the (relatively small) number 138201162401719 and I want to shrink the number of characters (I know this does not help with saving disk space) to the fewest possible number of characters. There are 26 letters in the English alphabet (but i count them as 25 since we need a zero letter). If I start splitting up my large number into pieces that are each 25 or less I get:
13, 8, 20, 11, 6, 24, 0, 17, 19
If I then count the numbers of the alphabet a=0, b=1, c=2, d=3... I can convert this to:
NIULGYART
So I went from 15 digits long (138201162401719) to 9 characters long (NIULGYART). This could of course be easily converted back to the original number as well.
So...my first question is "Does this have a name" and my second "Does anyone have PHP code that will do the conversion (in both directions)?"
I am looking for proper terminology so that I can do my own research in Google...though working code examples are cool too.
This only possible if you're considering to store your number before processing as a string. Because you can't store huge number as integers. You will lost the precision (13820116240171986468445 will be stored as 1.3820116240172E+22) so the alot of digits are lost.
If you're considering storing the number as a string this will be your answer:
Functions used: intval, chr and preg_match_all.
<?php
$regex = '/(2[0-5])|(1[0-9])|([0-9])/';
$numberString = '138201162401719';
preg_match_all($regex, $numberString, $numberArray, PREG_SET_ORDER);
echo($numberString . " -> ");
foreach($numberArray as $value){
$character = chr (intval($value[0]) + 65);
echo($character);
}
?>
Demo
This is the result:
138201162401719 -> NIULGYART
Here's how I would do it:
Store the big number as a string and split it into an array of numbers containing one digit each
Loop through the array extract 2-digit chunks using substr()
Check if the number is less than 26 (in which case, it is an alphabet) and add them to an array
Use array_map() with chr() to create a new array of characters from the above array
Implode the resulting array to get the cipher
In code:
$str = '138201162401719';
$arr = str_split($str);
$i = 0; // starting from the left
while ($i < count($arr)) {
$n = substr($str, $i, 2);
$firstchar = substr($n, 0, 1);
if ($n < 26 && $firstchar != 0) {
$result[] = substr($str, $i, 2);
$i += 2; // advance two characters
} else {
$result[] = substr($str, $i, 1);
$i++; // advance one character
}
}
$output = array_map(function($n) {
return chr($n+65);
}, $result);
echo implode($output); // => NIULGYART
Demo.
As an alternative, you could convert the input integer to express it in base 26, instead of base 10. Something like (pseudocode):
func convertBase26(num)
if (num < 0)
return "-" & convertBase26(-num) // '&' is concatenate.
else if (num = 0)
return "A"
endif
output = "";
while (num > 0)
output <- ('A' + num MOD 26) & output // Modulus operator.
num <- num DIV 26 // Integer division.
endwhile
return output
endfunc
This uses A = 0, B = 1, up to Z = 25 and standard place notation: 26 = BA. Obviously a base conversion is easily reversible.
strtr() is a magnificent tool for this task! It replaces the longest match as is traverses the string.
Code: (Demo)
function toAlpha ($num) {
return strtr($num, range("A", "Z"));
}
$string = toAlpha("138201162401719");
echo "$string\n";
$string = toAlpha("123456789012345");
echo "$string\n";
$string = toAlpha("101112131415161");
echo "$string\n";
$string = toAlpha("2625242322212019");
echo "$string";
Output:
NIULGYART
MDEFGHIJAMDEF
KLMNOPQB
CGZYXWVUT
Just flip the lookup array to reverse the conversion: https://3v4l.org/YsFZu
Merged: https://3v4l.org/u3NQ5
Of course, I must mention that there is a vulnerability with converting a sequence of letters to numbers and back to letters. Consider BB becomes 11 then is mistaken for eleven which would traslate to L when converted again.
There are ways to mitigate this by adjusting the lookup array, but that may not be necessary/favorable depending on program requirements.
And here is another consideration from CodeReview.
I have been trying to do the same thing in PHP without success.
Assuming I'm using the 26 letters of the English alphabet, starting with A = 0 down to Z as 25:
I find the highest power of 26 lower than the number I am encoding. I divide it by the best power of 26 I found. Of the result I take away the integer, convert it to a letter and multiply the decimals by 26. I keep doing that until I get a whole number. It's ok to get a zero as it's an A, but if it has decimals it must be multiplied.
For 1 billion which is DGEHTYM and it's done in 6 loops obviously. Although my answer demonstrates how to encode, I'm afraid it does not help doing so on PHP which is what I'm trying to do myself. I hope the algorithm helps people out there though.
I have a range of whole numbers that might or might not have some numbers missing. Is it possible to find the smallest missing number without using a loop structure? If there are no missing numbers, the function should return the maximum value of the range plus one.
This is how I solved it using a for loop:
$range = [0,1,2,3,4,6,7];
// sort just in case the range is not in order
asort($range);
$range = array_values($range);
$first = true;
for ($x = 0; $x < count($range); $x++)
{
// don't check the first element
if ( ! $first )
{
if ( $range[$x - 1] + 1 !== $range[$x])
{
echo $range[$x - 1] + 1;
break;
}
}
// if we're on the last element, there are no missing numbers
if ($x + 1 === count($range))
{
echo $range[$x] + 1;
}
$first = false;
}
Ideally, I'd like to avoid looping completely, as the range can be massive. Any suggestions?
Algo solution
There is a way to check if there is a missing number using an algorithm. It's explained here. Basically if we need to add numbers from 1 to 100. We don't need to calculate by summing them we just need to do the following: (100 * (100 + 1)) / 2. So how is this going to solve our issue ?
We're going to get the first element of the array and the last one. We calculate the sum with this algo. We then use array_sum() to calculate the actual sum. If the results are the same, then there is no missing number. We could then "backtrack" the missing number by substracting the actual sum from the calculated one. This of course only works if there is only one number missing and will fail if there are several missing. So let's put this in code:
$range = range(0,7); // Creating an array
echo check($range) . "\r\n"; // check
unset($range[3]); // unset offset 3
echo check($range); // check
function check($array){
if($array[0] == 0){
unset($array[0]); // get ride of the zero
}
sort($array); // sorting
$first = reset($array); // get the first value
$last = end($array); // get the last value
$sum = ($last * ($first + $last)) / 2; // the algo
$actual_sum = array_sum($array); // the actual sum
if($sum == $actual_sum){
return $last + 1; // no missing number
}else{
return $sum - $actual_sum; // missing number
}
}
Output
8
3
Online demo
If there are several numbers missing, then just use array_map() or something similar to do an internal loop.
Regex solution
Let's take this to a new level and use regex ! I know it's nonsense, and it shouldn't be used in real world application. The goal is to show the true power of regex :)
So first let's make a string out of our range in the following format: I,II,III,IIII for range 1,3.
$range = range(0,7);
if($range[0] === 0){ // get ride of 0
unset($range[0]);
}
$str = implode(',', array_map(function($val){return str_repeat('I', $val);}, $range));
echo $str;
The output should be something like: I,II,III,IIII,IIIII,IIIIII,IIIIIII.
I've come up with the following regex: ^(?=(I+))(^\1|,\2I|\2I)+$. So what does this mean ?
^ # match begin of string
(?= # positive lookahead, we use this to not "eat" the match
(I+) # match I one or more times and put it in group 1
) # end of lookahead
( # start matching group 2
^\1 # match begin of string followed by what's matched in group 1
| # or
,\2I # match a comma, with what's matched in group 2 (recursive !) and an I
| # or
\2I # match what's matched in group 2 and an I
)+ # repeat one or more times
$ # match end of line
Let's see what's actually happening ....
I,II,III,IIII,IIIII,IIIIII,IIIIIII
^
(I+) do not eat but match I and put it in group 1
I,II,III,IIII,IIIII,IIIIII,IIIIIII
^
^\1 match what was matched in group 1, which means I gets matched
I,II,III,IIII,IIIII,IIIIII,IIIIIII
^^^ ,\2I match what was matched in group 1 (one I in thise case) and add an I to it
I,II,III,IIII,IIIII,IIIIII,IIIIIII
^^^^ \2I match what was matched previously in group 2 (,II in this case) and add an I to it
I,II,III,IIII,IIIII,IIIIII,IIIIIII
^^^^^ \2I match what was matched previously in group 2 (,III in this case) and add an I to it
We're moving forward since there is a + sign which means match one or more times,
this is actually a recursive regex.
We put the $ to make sure it's the end of string
If the number of I's don't correspond, then the regex will fail.
See it working and failing. And Let's put it in PHP code:
$range = range(0,7);
if($range[0] === 0){
unset($range[0]);
}
$str = implode(',', array_map(function($val){return str_repeat('I', $val);}, $range));
if(preg_match('#^(?=(I*))(^\1|,\2I|\2I)+$#', $str)){
echo 'works !';
}else{
echo 'fails !';
}
Now let's take in account to return the number that's missing, we will remove the $ end character to make our regex not fail, and we use group 2 to return the missed number:
$range = range(0,7);
if($range[0] === 0){
unset($range[0]);
}
unset($range[2]); // remove 2
$str = implode(',', array_map(function($val){return str_repeat('I', $val);}, $range));
preg_match('#^(?=(I*))(^\1|,\2I|\2I)+#', $str, $m); // REGEEEEEX !!!
$n = strlen($m[2]); //get the length ie the number
$sum = array_sum($range); // array sum
if($n == $sum){
echo $n + 1; // no missing number
}else{
echo $n - 1; // missing number
}
Online demo
EDIT: NOTE
This question is about performance. Functions like array_diff and array_filter are not magically fast. They can add a huge time penalty. Replacing a loop in your code with a call to array_diff will not magically make things fast, and will probably make things slower. You need to understand how these functions work if you intend to use them to speed up your code.
This answer uses the assumption that no items are duplicated and no invalid elements exist to allow us to use the position of the element to infer its expected value.
This answer is theoretically the fastest possible solution if you start with a sorted list. The solution posted by Jack is theoretically the fastest if sorting is required.
In the series [0,1,2,3,4,...], the n'th element has the value n if no elements before it are missing. So we can spot-check at any point to see if our missing element is before or after the element in question.
So you start by cutting the list in half and checking to see if the item at position x = x
[ 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 9 ]
^
Yup, list[4] == 4. So move halfway from your current point the end of the list.
[ 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 9 ]
^
Uh-oh, list[6] == 7. So somewhere between our last checkpoint and the current one, one element was missing. Divide the difference in half and check that element:
[ 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 9 ]
^
In this case, list[5] == 5
So we're good there. So we take half the distance between our current check and the last one that was abnormal. And oh.. it looks like cell n+1 is one we already checked. We know that list[6]==7 and list[5]==5, so the element number 6 is the one that's missing.
Since each step divides the number of elements to consider in half, you know that your worst-case performance is going to check no more than log2 of the total list size. That is, this is an O(log(n)) solution.
If this whole arrangement looks familiar, It's because you learned it back in your second year of college in a Computer Science class. It's a minor variation on the binary search algorithm--one of the most widely used index schemes in the industry. Indeed this question appears to be a perfectly-contrived application for this searching technique.
You can of course repeat the operation to find additional missing elements, but since you've already tested the values at key elements in the list, you can avoid re-checking most of the list and go straight to the interesting ones left to test.
Also note that this solution assumes a sorted list. If the list isn't sorted then obviously you sort it first. Except, binary searching has some notable properties in common with quicksort. It's quite possible that you can combine the process of sorting with the process of finding the missing element and do both in a single operation, saving yourself some time.
Finally, to sum up the list, that's just a stupid math trick thrown in for good measure. The sum of a list of numbers from 1 to N is just N*(N+1)/2. And if you've already determined that any elements are missing, then obvously just subtract the missing ones.
Technically, you can't really do without the loop (unless you only want to know if there's a missing number). However, you can accomplish this without first sorting the array.
The following algorithm uses O(n) time with O(n) space:
$range = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7];
$N = count($range);
$temp = str_repeat('0', $N); // assume all values are out of place
foreach ($range as $value) {
if ($value < $N) {
$temp[$value] = 1; // value is in the right place
}
}
// count number of leading ones
echo strspn($temp, '1'), PHP_EOL;
It builds an ordered identity map of N entries, marking each value against its position as "1"; in the end all entries must be "1", and the first "0" entry is the smallest value that's missing.
Btw, I'm using a temporary string instead of an array to reduce physical memory requirements.
I honestly don't get why you wouldn't want to use a loop. There's nothing wrong with loops. They're fast, and you simply can't do without them. However, in your case, there is a way to avoid having to write your own loops, using PHP core functions. They do loop over the array, though, but you simply can't avoid that.
Anyway, I gather what you're after, can easily be written in 3 lines:
function highestPlus(array $in)
{
$compare = range(min($in), max($in));
$diff = array_diff($compare, $in);
return empty($diff) ? max($in) +1 : $diff[0];
}
Tested with:
echo highestPlus(range(0,11));//echoes 12
$arr = array(9,3,4,1,2,5);
echo highestPlus($arr);//echoes 6
And now, to shamelessly steal Pé de Leão's answer (but "augment" it to do exactly what you want):
function highestPlus(array $range)
{//an unreadable one-liner... horrid, so don't, but know that you can...
return min(array_diff(range(0, max($range)+1), $range)) ?: max($range) +1;
}
How it works:
$compare = range(min($in), max($in));//range(lowest value in array, highest value in array)
$diff = array_diff($compare, $in);//get all values present in $compare, that aren't in $in
return empty($diff) ? max($in) +1 : $diff[0];
//-------------------------------------------------
// read as:
if (empty($diff))
{//every number in min-max range was found in $in, return highest value +1
return max($in) + 1;
}
//there were numbers in min-max range, not present in $in, return first missing number:
return $diff[0];
That's it, really.
Of course, if the supplied array might contain null or falsy values, or even strings, and duplicate values, it might be useful to "clean" the input a bit:
function highestPlus(array $in)
{
$clean = array_filter(
$in,
'is_numeric'//or even is_int
);
$compare = range(min($clean), max($clean));
$diff = array_diff($compare, $clean);//duplicates aren't an issue here
return empty($diff) ? max($clean) + 1; $diff[0];
}
Useful links:
The array_diff man page
The max and min functions
Good Ol' range, of course...
The array_filter function
The array_map function might be worth a look
Just as array_sum might be
$range = array(0,1,2,3,4,6,7);
// sort just in case the range is not in order
asort($range);
$range = array_values($range);
$indexes = array_keys($range);
$diff = array_diff($indexes,$range);
echo $diff[0]; // >> will print: 5
// if $diff is an empty array - you can print
// the "maximum value of the range plus one": $range[count($range)-1]+1
echo min(array_diff(range(0, max($range)+1), $range));
Simple
$array1 = array(0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7);// array with actual number series
$array2 = array(0,1,2,4,6,7); // array with your custom number series
$missing = array_diff($array1,$array2);
sort($missing);
echo $missing[0];
$range = array(0,1,2,3,4,6,7);
$max=max($range);
$expected_total=($max*($max+1))/2; // sum if no number was missing.
$actual_total=array_sum($range); // sum of the input array.
if($expected_total==$actual_total){
echo $max+1; // no difference so no missing number, then echo 1+ missing number.
}else{
echo $expected_total-$actual_total; // the difference will be the missing number.
}
you can use array_diff() like this
<?php
$range = array("0","1","2","3","4","6","7","9");
asort($range);
$len=count($range);
if($range[$len-1]==$len-1){
$r=$range[$len-1];
}
else{
$ref= range(0,$len-1);
$result = array_diff($ref,$range);
$r=implode($result);
}
echo $r;
?>
function missing( $v ) {
static $p = -1;
$d = $v - $p - 1;
$p = $v;
return $d?1:0;
}
$result = array_search( 1, array_map( "missing", $ARRAY_TO_TEST ) );
There is a problem in Interview Street challange. Maybe the most easiest of all challenges. "Unfriendly Numbers", is the name and question goes like this.
There is one friendly number and N unfriendly numbers. We want to find how many numbers are there which exactly divide the friendly number, but does not divide any of the unfriendly numbers.
Input Format:
The first line of input contains two numbers N and K seperated by spaces. N is the number of unfriendly numbers, K is the friendly number.
The second line of input contains N space separated unfriendly numbers.
Output Format:
Output the answer in a single line.
I did a PHP programming like this:
<?php
/* Enter your code here. Read input from STDIN. Print output to STDOUT */
$handle = fopen ("php://stdin","r");
$input = fgets($handle);
$num_unfriendly_number=substr($input,0,1);
$friendly_number=substr($input,2,1);
$input2=fgets($handle);
for($i=0;$i<=($num_unfriendly_number); $i=$i+2){
$unfriendly_numbers[$i]=substr($input2,$i,1);
}
//truncates additional input
//now getting divisiors of given friendly numbers
$check_num=1;
//one is always a divisor of any number
$divisior[0]=1;
$arrayindex=1;
for($check_num; $check_num<=$friendly_number; $check_num++){
$hold_var=$friendly_number%$check_num;
if($hold_var==0){
$divisor[$arrayindex]=$check_num;
$arrayindex++;
}
}
$index=0;
foreach($divisor as $test_div){
$output=true;
foreach($unfriendly_numbers as $test_unfrnd){
if($test_unfrnd%$test_div){
$output=false;
}
}
if ($output){
$outputarray[$index]=$test_div;
$index++; //edited afterwards after #Boris's suggestion but didn't work :(
}
}
$num_of_output=count($outputarray);
define('STDOUT',fopen("php://stout","r"));
fwrite(STDOUT,$num_of_output);
?>
The above programme worked fine for 2 testcases but did not applied for other tests. I did some research but did not found any errors. Any helps please. Thanks in advance.
Fist of all I would like to mention that I do not know php. However, I think this is simple enough I can try to help.
Several errors I see:
for($i=0;$i<=($num_unfriendly_number); $i=$i+2){
$unfriendly_numbers[$i]=substr($input2,$i,1);
}
Here you use substr($input2,$i,1);, this however assumes all your unfriendly numbers are digits, which might not always be the case. Better use the split function in php. Replace the whole while with the following:
$unfriendly_numbers = explode(" ", $input2);
After that:
$index=0;
foreach($divisor as $test_div){
$output=true;
foreach($unfriendly_numbers as $test_unfrnd){
if($test_unfrnd%$test_div){
$output=false;
}
}
if ($output){
$outputarray[$index]=$test_div;
}
}
Here you never increase the $index variable. Isn't this meaning that you will override the divisors one with other? USe the operator []=. It appends to an array in php:
if ($output){
$outputarray []= $test_div;
}
EDIT One more error I see is that you count on the friendly number to be a digit too. You can fix this too:
$friendly_number=substr($input,2,1);
->
$friendly_number=explode(" ", $input)[0];
I have the same problem I can't understand why this code can't finish in less than 16 seconds!
I would like to hear your tricks
a = raw_input()# this will read this line: 8 16
b = raw_input()# this will read this line: 2 5 7 4 3 8 3 18
al = a.split()
bl = b.split()
blint = []
fn = int(al[1])
fnlist = [fn]
half_fn = fn / 2 # only I go to half the number to save some time
k = 1
while k <= half_fn:
if fn % k == 0:
fnlist.append(k)
k += 1
plist = []
for j in bl:
blint.append(int(j)) # here I changed the bl list elements which are string to int
for i in fnlist:
for j in blint: #I have the int elements so I don't need every time bring the string and change it to int
if j % i == 0:
plist.append(i)
break
counter = len(fnlist) - len(plist)
print counter
I need help to change a character in php.
I got some code from the web:
char dest='a';
int conv=(int)dest;
Can I use this code to convert a character into numeric? Or do you have any ideas?
I just want to show the result as a decimal number:
if null == 0
if A == 1
Use ord() to return the ascii value. Subtract 96 to return a number where a=1, b=2....
Upper and lower case letters have different ASCII values, so if you want to handle them the same, you can use strtolower() to convert upper case to lower case.
To handle the NULL case, simply use if($dest). This will be true if $dest is something other than NULL or 0.
PHP is a loosely typed language, so there is no need to declare the types. So char dest='a'; is incorrect. Variables have $ prefix in PHP and no type declaration, so it should be $dest = 'a';.
Live Example
<?php
function toNumber($dest)
{
if ($dest)
return ord(strtolower($dest)) - 96;
else
return 0;
}
// Let's test the function...
echo toNumber(NULL) . " ";
echo toNumber('a') . " ";
echo toNumber('B') . " ";
echo toNumber('c');
// Output is:
// 0 1 2 3
?>
PS:
You can look at the ASCII values here.
It does indeed work as in the sample, except that you should be using php syntax (and as a sidenote: the language that code you found most probably was, it did not do the same thing).
So:
$in = "123";
$out = (int)$in;
Afterwards the following will be true:
$out === 123
This may help you:
http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.ord.php
So, if you need the ASCII code you will need to do:
$dest = 'a';
$conv = ord($dest);
If you want something like:
a == 1
b == 2
.
.
.
you should do:
$dest = 'a';
$conv = ord($dest)-96;
For more info on the ASCII codes: http://www.asciitable.com/
And for the function ord: http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.ord.php
It's very hard to answer because it's not a real question but just a little bit of it.
But if you ask.
It seems you need some translation table, that defines links between letters and numbers
A -> 2
B -> 3
C -> 4
S -> 1
or whatever.
You can achieve this by using an array, where keys would be these letters and values - desired numbers.
$defects_arr = array(
'A' -> 2,
'B' -> 3,
'C' -> 4'
'S' -> 1
};
Thus, you can convert these letters to numbers
$letter = 'A';
$number = $defects_arr($letter);
echo $number; // outputs 1
But it still seems is not what you want.
Do these defect types have any verbose equivalents? If so, why not to use them instead of letters?
Telling the whole story instead of little bit of it will help you to avoid mistakes and will save a ton of time, both yours and those who to answer.
Out of this question, if you are looking for convert RT0005 to 5
$max = 'RT0005';
return base_convert($max,10,10);
// return 5