On Monday, 9 June 2014 at 07:58:25 UTC, Timothee Cour via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Is there a more idiomatic/elegant way to achieve the following,
while
remaining as efficient as possible?
Same question in the simpler case n==0?
using retro seems inefficient because of all the decodings
// returns the largest suffix of a that contains no more than n
times c
string findBack(string a, char c, size_t n=0){
auto b=cast(immutable(ubyte)[])a;
auto val=cast(ubyte)c;
size_t counter=0;
for(ptrdiff_t i=cast(ptrdiff_t)b.length - 1; i>=0; i--){
if(b[i]==c){
if(counter>=n)
return cast(string)a[i+1..$];
counter++;
}
}
return a;
}
//unittest{
void test3(){
auto c='\n';
string a="abc1\nabc2\nabc3";
assert(a.findBack(c,0)=="abc3");
assert(a.findBack(c,1)=="abc2\nabc3");
assert(a.findBack(c,2)=="abc1\nabc2\nabc3");
assert(a.findBack(c,3)=="abc1\nabc2\nabc3");
}
If you are going to cast the string to ubyte[] anyway, why not
just do this before using retro?