[RESOURCE] Search for a word in a string

[Axolotl2]

Code: [Select]

function strStrW(%string, %searchForWord)
{
    for(%i=0;%i<=getWordCount(%string)-1;%i++)
    {
if(getWord(%string,%i) $= %searchForWord)
    return %i;
    }
    return -1;
}
Example 1: strStrW("cakemaker is very happy","ca") would return -1, unlike strStr.

Example 2: strStrW("cakemaker is very happy","very") would return 2.

[Ad Bot]

[Ipquarx]

It's good to have this handy.

[elm]

http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Search_a_list#TorqueScript

[Lugnut]

make it return false instead of -1

or do those both work

[Xalos]

make it return false instead of -1

or do those both work

false == 0

[Headcrab Zombie]

make it return false instead of -1

or do those both work

False would equal 0, and then how do you tell the difference between not found, and found at the beginning of the string?

[Red_Guy]

Code: [Select]

function strStrW(%string, %searchForWord)
{
    for(%i=0;%i<=getWordCount(%string)-1;%i++)
    {
if(getWord(%string,%i) $= %searchForWord)
    return %i;
    }
    return -1;
}
Example 1: strStrW("cakemaker is very happy","ca") would return -1, unlike strStr.

Example 2: strStrW("cakemaker is very happy","very") would return 2.

How about this instead:

Code: [Select]

function strStrW(%string, %searchForWord)
{
  return strStr(" " @ %string @ " ", " " @ %searchForWord @ " " );
}

for big strings, it should run a lot faster

[Ipquarx]

That will not return the WORD index, believe me I literally thought of the exact same code.

[Brian Smithers]

What about this

Code: [Select]

function strStrW(%s,%sw)
{
       return strPos(" " @ %s @ " ", " " @ %sw @ " " );
}
?

[Ipquarx]

not only will it not work because %string doesn't exist, but it was JUST mentioned two posts above yours.

[Randomness]

Good god I probably need this.

[Ipquarx]

I knew there was a better way to do this, so here it is:

Code: [Select]

function findWordInString(%string, %word)
{
%word = trim(%word);
%index = striPos(" " @ %string @ " ", " " @ %word @ " ");
if(%index < 2)
return %index;

%before = getSubStr(%string, 0, %index);
return strLen(%before)-strLen(strReplace(%before, " ", ""));
}This will do the exact same thing, but without any for loops.

[Brian Smithers]

I knew there was a better way to do this, so here it is:

Code: [Select]

function findWordInString(%string, %word)
{
%word = trim(%word);
%index = striPos(" " @ %string @ " ", " " @ %word @ " ");
if(%index < 2)
return %index;

%before = getSubStr(%string, 0, %index);
return strLen(%before)-strLen(strReplace(%before, " ", ""));
}This will do the exact same thing, but without any for loops.

neeat.

[TripNick]

This will do the exact same thing, but without any for loops.

For loops aren't the devil's creation, and striPos uses a for loop in C++ so technically it still utilizes a for loop.

[Ipquarx]

For loops aren't the devil's creation, and striPos uses a for loop in C++ so technically it still utilizes a for loop.

when did i say for loops were bad
they're just a bit slower that's all.