Related
So, basically I'm trying to count the number of landline phone numbers in a list of both landlines and mobile phone numbers $mobile_list (071234567890,02039989435,0781...)
$mobile_array = explode(",",$mobile_list); // turn into an array
$landlines = array_count_values($mobile_array); // create count variable
echo $landlines["020..."]; // print the number of numbers
So, I get the basic count specific elements function, but I don't see where I can specify if an element 'starts with' or 'contains' a sequence. With the above you can only specify an exact phone number (obviously not useful).
Any help would be great!
I don't see any reason to first explode the string to an array, and then check each array item.
That is a complete waste of performance!
I suggest using preg_match_all and match with word boundary "020".
That means the "word" has to start with 020.
$mobile_list = "071234567890,02039989435,0781,020122,123020";
preg_match_all("/\b020\d+\b/", $mobile_list, $m);
var_dump($m);
echo count($m[0]); // 2
https://3v4l.org/ucSDm
The lightest and fastest method I have found is to explode on ",020".
The array that is returned has item 0 as undefined, meaning we don't know if it's a 020 number so I have to look at that manually.
$temp = explode(",020", $mobile_list);
$cnt = count($temp);
if(substr($temp[0],0,3) != "020") $cnt--;
echo $cnt;
A small scale test shows this as the fastest method.
https://3v4l.org/rD54d
You can use array_reduce() to count the occurrences of strings beginning with '020'
$mobile_list = "02039619491,07143502893,02088024526,07351261813,02095694897";
$mobile_array = explode(',', $mobile_list);
function landlineCount($carry, $item)
{
if (substr($item, 0, 3) === '020') {
return $carry += 1;
}
return $carry;
}
$count = array_reduce($mobile_array, 'landlineCount');
echo $count;
prints 3
I'm sure the OP has finished what they needed to do hours ago but for fun here is a faster way to count the landlines.
I hadn't spotted that the question original code was exploding the string.
That isn't necessary, you can just count the sub strings with substr_count() this could miss the first which wouldn't have a comma before it so I check for that too with substr().
If you need the total count of all numbers you can just count the commas with substr_count() again and add one.
$count = substr($mobile_list, 0, 3) === '020' ? 1 : 0;
$count += substr_count($mobile_list, ",020");
$totalCount = substr_count($mobile_list, ",") + 1;
echo $count;
echo $totalCount;
Here is the bench run a 1000 times to get an average.
https://3v4l.org/Sma66
Use array_filter() or preg_grep() functions to find all numbers that contain or starts with given number sequence.
Note: There is easier and better solution in other answers that cover request to find values that start with given number sequence.
Because you have mentioned - "but I don't see where I can specify if an element 'starts with' or 'contains' a sequence." - My code assumes that you wan't to find any occurrence of sequence, not only in start of string of each item.
$mobile_list = '02000, 02032435, 039002300, 00305600';
$mobile_array = explode(",",$mobile_list); // turn into an array
$landlines = array_count_values($mobile_array); // create count variable
$sequence = '020'; // print the number of numbers
function filter_phone_numbers($mobile_array, $sequence){
return array_filter($mobile_array, function ($item) use ($sequence) {
if (stripos($item, $sequence) !== false) {
return true;
}
return false;
});
}
$filtered_items = array_unique (filter_phone_numbers($mobile_array, $sequence)); //use array_unique in case we find same number that both contains or starts with sequence
echo count($filtered_items);
Or with preg_grep():
$mobile_list = '02000, 02032435, 039002300, 00305600';
$mobile_array = explode(",",$mobile_list); // turn into an array
$landlines = array_count_values($mobile_array); // create count variable
$sequence = preg_quote('020', '~'); ; // print the number of numbers
function grep_phone_numbers($mobile_array, $sequence){
return preg_grep('~' . $sequence . '~', $mobile_array);
}
//use array_unique in case we find same number that both contains or starts with sequence
$filtered_items = array_unique(grep_phone_numbers($mobile_array, $sequence));
echo count($filtered_items);
I recommend doing this with the database. The database is design to manage data and can do it a lot more efficient than PHP can. You can simply put it into a query and just get the result you want in 1 go:
SELECT * FROM phone_numbers WHERE number LIKE '020%'
If you get the data from the database anyways, that LIKE adds a little time to the query, but less that it takes PHP to loop, strpos and store the results. Also, as you return a smaller dataset, less resources are being used.
I am generating random numbers using php random function, but I want the generated number should be unique and it should not be repeated again.
----------
php code
$number = rand(100,100000); //a six digit random number between 100 to 100000
echo $number;
----------
but I am using this function for multiple times in my code for users so at very rare case there should be a chance of generating same number again. how can i avoid that.
I would do this:
You said you have branches. The receipt id could look something like this:
$dateString = date('Ymd'); //Generate a datestring.
$branchNumber = 101; //Get the branch number somehow.
$receiptNumber = 1; //You will query the last receipt in your database
//and get the last $receiptNumber for that branch and add 1 to it.;
if($receiptNumber < 9999) {
$receiptNumber = $receiptNumber + 1;
}else{
$receiptNumber = 1;
}
Update the receipt database with the receipt number.
$dateString . '-' . $branchNumber . '-' . $receiptNumber;
This will read:
20180406-101-1
This will be unique(Provided you do less than 10,000 transactions a day.) and will show your employees easily readable information.
If you are storing users in DB you should create column [ID] as primary key with auto increment and that would be best solution.
In other case I'd recommend you to simply store all user id's in ascending order from N to M by reading last ID and adding 1 to it because I see no real gain from random order that only adds complexity to your code.
There are many ways, example:
$freq = [];
$number = rand(100,100000);
$times = 10;
while($times-- > 0)
{
while(in_array($number, $freq))$number = rand(100,100000);
$freq[] = $number;
echo $number . "<br>";
}
This will print 10 random unique numbers.
random_int
(PHP 7)
<?php
$number = random_int(100, 100000);
echo $number;
All you need to do is use timestamp in php as timestamp never cross each other hence it will always generate unique number.You can use time() function in php.
The time() function is used to format the timestamp into a human desired format. The timestamp is the number of seconds between the current time and 1st January, 1970 00:00:00 GMT. It is also known as the UNIX timestamp.
<?php
$t=time();
echo $t;
?>
Also you add a rand() function and insert it in front of the $t to make it more random as if few users work at same time then the timestamp might collide.
<?php
$number = rand(100,100000);
$t=time();
$random = $number.''.$t;
echo $random;
?>
The above will reduce the chance to timestamp collide hence making the probability of number uniqueness almost 100%.
And if you make your column unique in your database then the php wont insert the number hence this bottleneck will ensure you will always get a unique random number.
bill_id not null unique
If you are using it for something like user id, then you can use uniqid for that. This command gets a prefixed unique identifier based on the current time in microseconds.
Here's how to use it:
string uniqid ([ string $prefix = "" [, bool $more_entropy = FALSE]] )
Where prefix is used if you are generating ids for a lot if hosts at the same time, you can use this to differentiate between various hosts if id is generated at the same microsecond.
more_entropy increases the likeness of getting unique values.
Usage:
<?php
/* A uniqid, like: 4b3403665fea6 */
printf("uniqid(): %s\r\n", uniqid());
/* We can also prefix the uniqid, this the same as
* doing:
*
* $uniqid = $prefix . uniqid();
* $uniqid = uniqid($prefix);
*/
printf("uniqid('php_'): %s\r\n", uniqid('php_'));
/* We can also activate the more_entropy parameter, which is
* required on some systems, like Cygwin. This makes uniqid()
* produce a value like: 4b340550242239.64159797
*/
printf("uniqid('', true): %s\r\n", uniqid('', true));
?>
this code must work
some description about code:
generate unique id
extract numbers form unique id with regex
gathering numbers from regex with a loop
<?php
$unique = uniqid("",true);
preg_match_all("!\d+!", $unique ,$matches);
print_r($matches);
$numbers = "";
foreach($matches[0] as $key => $num){
$numbers .= $num;
}
echo $numbers;
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", $ARRAY_TO_TEST ) );
I need to develop a task system that should be able to work on servers that doesn't support crontab.
I'm asking if there is any existing code that can take a cron string (e.g. '0 0,12 1 */2 *' and return the timestamp of the next scheduled run.
If such a code couldn't be found then how should I start with that?
You could use this class PHP-Parse-cron-strings-and-compute-schedules
It'll also compute the last scheduled run
Use this function:
function parse_crontab($time, $crontab)
{$time=explode(' ', date('i G j n w', strtotime($time)));
$crontab=explode(' ', $crontab);
foreach ($crontab as $k=>&$v)
{$time[$k]=intval($time[$k]);
$v=explode(',', $v);
foreach ($v as &$v1)
{$v1=preg_replace(array('/^\*$/', '/^\d+$/', '/^(\d+)\-(\d+)$/', '/^\*\/(\d+)$/'),
array('true', $time[$k].'===\0', '(\1<='.$time[$k].' and '.$time[$k].'<=\2)', $time[$k].'%\1===0'),
$v1
);
}
$v='('.implode(' or ', $v).')';
}
$crontab=implode(' and ', $crontab);
return eval('return '.$crontab.';');
}
var_export(parse_crontab('2011-05-04 02:08:03', '*/2,3-5,9 2 3-5 */2 *'));
var_export(parse_crontab('2011-05-04 02:08:03', '*/8 */2 */4 */5 *'));
You can try this: http://mtdowling.com/blog/2012/06/03/cron-expressions-in-php/ which use PHP Cron-Expression parser library, a php class https://github.com/mtdowling/cron-expression
I found diyism had a great answer, but found a crucial bug.
If you enter a cron time such as 0 * * * *, it'll run at 0 minute, 8th, minute and 9th minute. The code gives a conditional 08===0, which returns true, because PHP interprets numbers starting with 0 as octal, and 08 and 09 are not valid octal numbers so they're interpreted as 0. More information here.
How to prevent PHP from doing octal math in conditionals? (why does 08 === 0)
Here's a fixed and well commented version of diyism's code.
// Parse CRON frequency
function parse_crontab($time, $crontab) {
// Get current minute, hour, day, month, weekday
$time = explode(' ', date('i G j n w', strtotime($time)));
// Split crontab by space
$crontab = explode(' ', $crontab);
// Foreach part of crontab
foreach ($crontab as $k => &$v) {
// Remove leading zeros to prevent octal comparison, but not if number is already 1 digit
$time[$k] = preg_replace('/^0+(?=\d)/', '', $time[$k]);
// 5,10,15 each treated as seperate parts
$v = explode(',', $v);
// Foreach part we now have
foreach ($v as &$v1) {
// Do preg_replace with regular expression to create evaluations from crontab
$v1 = preg_replace(
// Regex
array(
// *
'/^\*$/',
// 5
'/^\d+$/',
// 5-10
'/^(\d+)\-(\d+)$/',
// */5
'/^\*\/(\d+)$/'
),
// Evaluations
// trim leading 0 to prevent octal comparison
array(
// * is always true
'true',
// Check if it is currently that time,
$time[$k] . '===\0',
// Find if more than or equal lowest and lower or equal than highest
'(\1<=' . $time[$k] . ' and ' . $time[$k] . '<=\2)',
// Use modulus to find if true
$time[$k] . '%\1===0'
),
// Subject we are working with
$v1
);
}
// Join 5,10,15 with `or` conditional
$v = '(' . implode(' or ', $v) . ')';
}
// Require each part is true with `and` conditional
$crontab = implode(' and ', $crontab);
// Evaluate total condition to find if true
return eval('return ' . $crontab . ';');
}
I wrote a very powerful PHP class called CalendarEvent a long time ago:
https://github.com/cubiclesoft/php-misc/
It supports two different pattern syntaxes. Normal cron cannot handle certain complex patterns whereas the default CalendarEvent syntax handles any scheduling pattern you could ever need. The cron pattern syntax support is actually a fallback (prefix cron lines with cron and a space).
CalendarEvent was written mostly as a calendar event calculation class and just happened to support cron style "next trigger" mechanisms. It is actually designed to calculate an entire schedule for multiple months for the purpose of displaying a calendar to a user (hence the class name). I've also used the class as an intermediate solution to translate events between calendar platforms. That's the rarer scenario - I've more frequently utilized it for AddSchedule()/NextTrigger() cron-like solutions.
You can use the popular package PHP Cron Expression Parser: https://github.com/dragonmantank/cron-expression
This also is the built-in part of the Laravel Framework)
In the parse_crontab function:
Replace $time[$k] with intval($time[$k]) inside the preg_replace line
to compare two base10 numbers correctly.
I have a list of phrases and I want to know which two words occurred the most often in all of my phrases.
I tried playing with regex and other codes and I just cannot find the right way to do this.
Can anyone help?
eg:
I am purchasing a wallet
a wallet for 20$
purchasing a bag
I'd know that
a wallet occurred 2 times
purchasing a occurred 2 times
<?
$string = "I am purchasing a wallet a wallet for 20$ purchasing a bag";
//split string into words
$words = explode(' ', $string);
//make chunks block ie [0,1][2,3]...
$chunks = array_chunk($words, 2);
//remove first array element
unset($words[0]);
//make chunks block ie [0,1][2,3]...
//but since first element is removed , the real block will be [1,2][3,4]...
$alternateChunks = array_chunk($words, 2);
//merge both chunks
$totalChunks = array_merge($chunks,$alternateChunks);
$finalChunks = array();
foreach($totalChunks as $t)
{
//change the inside chunk to pharse using +
//+ can be replaced to space, if neeced
//to keep associative working + is used instead of white space
$finalChunks[] = implode('+', $t);
}
//count the words inside array
$result = array_count_values($finalChunks);
echo "<pre>";
print_r($result);
I hesitate to suggest this, as it's an extremely brute force way to go about it:
Take your string of words, explode it using the explode(" ", $string); command, then run it through a for loop checking every two word combination against every two words in the string.
$string = "I am purchasing a wallet a wallet for 20$ purchasing a bag";
$words = explode(" ", $string);
for ($t=0; $t<count($string); $t++)
{
for ($i=0; $i<count($string); $i++)
{
if (($words[$t] . words[$t+1]) == ($words[$i] . $word[$i+1])) {$count[$words[$i].$words[$i+1]]++}
}
}
So the nested for loop steps in, grabs the first two words, compares them to each other set of two consecutive words, then grabs the next two words and does it again. Every answer will have an answer of at least 1 (it will always match itself) but sorting the resulting array by size will give you the most repeated values.
Note that this will run (n-1)*(n-1) iterations, which could get unwieldy FAST.
Place them all into an array, and access them by the current word index and next word index.
I think this should do the trick. It will grab pairs of words, unless you are at the end of the string, where you'll get only one word.
$str = "I purchased a wallet because I wanted a wallet a wallet a wallet";
$words = explode(" ", $str);
$array_results = array();
for ($i = 0; $i<count($words); $i++) {
if ($i < count($words)-1) {
$pair = $words[$i] . " " . $words[$i+1]; echo $pair . "\n";
// Have to check if the key is in use yet to avoid a notice
$array_results[$pair] = isset($array_results[$pair]) ? $array_results[$pair] + 1 : 1;
}
// At the end of the array, just use a single word
else $array_results[$words[$i]] = isset($array_results[$words[$i]]) ? $array_results[$words[$i]] + 1 : 1;
}
// Sort the results
// use arsort() instead to get the highest first
asort($array_results);
// Prints:
Array
(
[I wanted] => 1
[wanted a] => 1
[wallet] => 1
[because I] => 1
[wallet because] => 1
[I purchased] => 1
[purchased a] => 1
[wallet a] => 2
[a wallet] => 4
)
Update changed ++ to +1 above since it wasn't working when tested...
Try to put it with explode into an array and count the values with array_count_values.
<?php
$text = "whatever";
$text_array = explode( ' ', $text);
$double_words = array();
for($c = 1; $c < count($text_array); $c++)
{
$double_words[] = $text_array[$c -1] . ' ' . $text_array[$c];
}
$result = array_count_values($double_words);
?>
I updated it now to two word version. Does this work for you?
array(9) {
["I am"]=> int(1)
["am purchasing"]=> int(1)
["purchasing a"]=> int(2)
["a wallet"]=> int(2)
["wallet a"]=> int(1)
["wallet for"]=> int(1)
["for 20$"]=> int(1)
["20$ purchasing"]=> int(1)
["a bag"]=> int(1)
}
Since you used the excel tag, I thought I'd give it a shot, and it's actually really easy.
Split string using space as delimiter. Data > Text to Columns... > Delimited > Delimiter: Space. Each word is now in its own cell.
Transpose the result (not strictly required but much easier to visualize). Copy, Edit > Paste Special... > Transpose.
Make cells containing consecutive word pairs. So if your words are in cells B5:B15, cell C5 should be =B5&" "&B6 (and drag down).
Count occurence of each word pair: In cell D5, =COUNTIF($C$5:$C$15,"="&C5), drag down.
Highlight the winner(s). Select C5:D15, Format > Conditional Formatting... > Formula Is =$D5=MAX($D$5:$D$15) and choose e.g. a yellow background.
Note that there is some inefficiency in step 4 because the count of each word pair will be calculated multiple times if that word pair occurs multiple times. If this is a concern, then you can first make a list of unique word pairs using Data > Filter > Advanced Filter... > Unique records only.
An automated VBA solution could easily be crafted by recording a macro of the above followed by some minor editing.
One way to go about it is to use SPLIT or a regex to split the sentences into words and store each into an array. Then take the array and create a dictionary object. When you add a term to the dictionary, if it's already there, add 1 to the .value to tally the count.
Here is some example code (far from perfect as it's just to show the overlying concept) that will take all the string in column A and generate a word frequency list in columns B and C. It's not exactly what you want, but should give you some ideas on how you can go about doing it I hope:
Sub FrequencyList()
Dim vArray As Variant
Dim myDict As Variant
Set myDict = CreateObject("Scripting.Dictionary")
Dim i As Long
Dim cell As range
With myDict
For Each cell In range("A1", cells(Rows.count, "A").End(xlUp))
vArray = Split(cell.Value, " ")
For i = LBound(vArray) To UBound(vArray)
If Not .exists(vArray(i)) Then
.Add vArray(i), 1
Else
.Item(vArray(i)) = .Item(vArray(i)) + 1
End If
Next
Next
range("B1").Resize(.count).Value = Application.Transpose(.keys)
range("C1").Resize(.count).Value = Application.Transpose(.items)
End With
End Sub