|
Excellent suggestion, Luis. All the functionality without all the bloat.
BDF
A learned fool is more a fool than an ignorant fool.
-- Moliere
|
|
|
|
|
hi guys
In my application i need to read a file and substitute a particular occurrence of a word/keyword by corresponding word... to do this i am using a excel sheet with 2 columns. first column will be the keywords to be searched in the source file and second will be the corresponding keyword to be replaced... can some one pls provide me with the code for doing the same. the prog me be able to read the source file do modification and store the file in the same location..
thanks
sid
|
|
|
|
|
After you build your list of replacements, use Regex.Replace to alter the file and then write back out. Come back when you have some code that is troubling you.
To get you started you will need FileStream, Regex, and a custom class or KeyValuePair to store your list of replacements. There is plenty on google[^] on these topics.
"Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper's bell of an approaching looter." --Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
rsiddhartht wrote: In my application i need to read a file and substitute a particular occurrence of a word/keyword by corresponding word... to do this i am using a excel sheet with 2 columns. first column will be the keywords to be searched in the source file and second will be the corresponding keyword to be replaced... can some one pls provide me with the code for doing the same. the prog me be able to read the source file do modification and store the file in the same location..
This is one inefficient Son Of a codeBloat. Why are you storing the matches in Excel? If only somebody had invented a technology where data could be stored and retrieved quickly and efficiently. Hey - there's a money making idea for you.
Anyway - once you've retrieved your data and read in the file you could always use a regex.replace or a string.replace.
|
|
|
|
|
Still learning C# and am using a structure as illustrated below to hold data.
To get the data out I cast the data into the relevant type.
My question is this - is this an okay way to store ones data or would using a dataset or other structure be faster or more efficient?
ArrayList - contains N members
Arraylist - contains 4 members
3 strings
1 Arraylist - contains N members
Arraylist - contains 3 members
1 string
1 byte
1 datetime
You always pass failure on the way to success.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting... I would do it slightly different. Use the struct keyword to create a structure. Then place structures inside of your ArrayList. It will be easier to reference.
Hogan
<br />
private ArrayList groupOfItems = new ArrayList();<br />
<br />
private struct GroupStruct<br />
{<br />
public string string1;<br />
public string string2;<br />
public string string3;<br />
public ArrayList subGroup;<br />
}<br />
<br />
private struct SubStruct<br />
{<br />
public string subString1;<br />
public byte oneByte;<br />
public DateTime subTime;<br />
}<br />
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks - looks good, structures are new to me so I will give them a go.
From what I understand structs are kept on the stack so access is faster as well.
You always pass failure on the way to success.
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: From what I understand structs are kept on the stack so access is faster as well.
a single struct would be, but if you're creating them inside an array list the memory they're stored in will be allocated by the arraylist which is on the heap.
You know, every time I tried to win a bar-bet about being able to count to 1000 using my fingers I always get punched out when I reach 4....
-- El Corazon
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: structures are new to me so I will give them a go.
Famous last words... 
You should stick to using classes until you have read up on what structures are used for, and how to implement them.
GuyThiebaut wrote: From what I understand structs are kept on the stack
Only if you declare one as a local variable in a method. If you put one in an ArrayList, an object is allocated on the heap to put the structure in. This is called boxing, and isn't very good for performance.
Also, your data contains objects, and they will always be stored on the heap, so there is not really much point in putting it in structures.
GuyThiebaut wrote: so access is faster as well
The structures would be a bit big, so they would actually not be that fast to access. A structure should not be larger than 16 bytes, and your data would be pushing that recommended limit.
Despite everything, the person most likely to be fooling you next is yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks - that's very helpful 
In terms of size my data would definitely be pushing beyond the 16 byte limit.
Time to read up on structures.
You always pass failure on the way to success.
|
|
|
|
|
Puttings structs in an ArrayList? I'm just waiting for the next question from this guy:
"I have a struct in an ArrayList, but when I try to change the values in the struct, it doesn't work. The struct in the ArrayList just stays the same."
Despite everything, the person most likely to be fooling you next is yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
If it does what you need...
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: If it does what you need...
... you're done. 
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks - I'm always trying to learn how to write more, to make use of an overused word, beautiful code.
So easy maintainability, speed of access, resource hungriness(starting to sound like GW) and elegance of coding are important to me as I have written some awful code in my time and had to maintain the some pretty badly written code.
You always pass failure on the way to success.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you want to change your sig, and aim at success from the start, trusting you will NOT
always pass failure...
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
As with Post-Its, some failures are successes in disguise.
I have (or had) a button that states:
"If at first you don't succeed, lower you standards."
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: some failures are successes in disguise
Absolutely, keep an open mind and look for unexpected opportunities...
PIEBALDconsult wrote: If at first you don't succeed, lower you standards
Nope. If your aim is worthwhile then keep your standards high, and increase your perseverance,
I would say.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you are stuck with framework 1.x, don't use the ArrayList class. It's obsolete.
Instead of storing different types of data in ArrayLists, make objects to store the data in, and make generic lists to store objects in.
List<C1> - contains N members
class C1 - contains:
3 strings
1 List<C2> - contains N members
class C2 - contains:
1 sting
1 byte
1 DateTime
This way you get rid of the boxing involved with storing value types in an ArrayList, the overhead of using ArrayLists only to store different kind of data, and you gain strict typing.
Despite everything, the person most likely to be fooling you next is yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
I've ended up using your list suggestion -it's a much better solution.
Thanks
You always pass failure on the way to success.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I have a program that I'm writing that sets up a little question and answer form by reading its items through a several XML documents and displaying each one on a seperate form. I am having a problem with one user who cannot see any of the controls that are created by the XML form. IE... it will load a blank form with no user controls on it. On his other computer (both Windows XP), it works fine. Anyone know any potential culprits?
Thanks,
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
PhilDanger wrote: I am having a problem with one user
Are you sure it's not a PEBKAC? 
But seriously, if this problem is isolated to one PC, which is how I understand your description of the problem, I'd be suspicious that it's the PC's problem. What exactly I can only guess. Maybe the .NET Framework needs an update? Maybe...?
BDF
A learned fool is more a fool than an ignorant fool.
-- Moliere
|
|
|
|
|
Could the issue relate to screen resolution ? I doubt it, but beyond that, his PC is hosed.
Christian Graus
Please read this if you don't understand the answer I've given you
"also I don't think "TranslateOneToTwoBillion OneHundredAndFortySevenMillion FourHundredAndEightyThreeThousand SixHundredAndFortySeven()" is a very good choice for a function name" - SpacixOne ( offering help to someone who really needed it ) ( spaces added for the benefit of people running at < 1280x1024 )
|
|
|
|
|
Help on navigating within rows and columns within a worksheet using C#.
|
|
|
|
|
In Excel, you mean? What exactly do you need help with? Have you looked up Visual Studio Tools for Office?
|
|
|
|
|
Check out this[^] article. It's based on J# but if you're smart enough you will figure it out how to do same things in Excel using C#.
- Stop thinking in terms of limitations and start thinking in terms of possibilities -
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
