String Equal To Javascript

| | | |

👻 Check our latest review to choose the best laptop for Machine Learning engineers and Deep learning tasks!

There are three ways to compare strings in Java. The Java method equals () compares two string objects, the equality operator == compares two strings, and the compareTo () method returns the number difference between two strings.

Comparing strings is a crucial part of working with strings in Java. For example, if you are building a coffee app that checks who ordered that drink, you might want to compare it with what you have on file.

client name This tutorial will discuss, with references and examples, how to compare strings in Java. We will discuss the three main options used to compare strings and explore the limitations of the == operator when comparing strings in Java.

By the end of reading this tutorial, you will be I will be an expert at comparing strings in Java.

Java Strings

Strings are used to store text-based data in programming. Strings in Java are defined as a sequence of characters in quotes. Here is an example of a string in Java:

In this example, we declare a string called day that stores the value Monday.

What if we wanted to compare string by another string? There are three main methods that can be used to compare strings in Java. These are:

  • Using == operator
  • Using equals () and equalsIgnoreCase ()
  • Using the compareTo () and compareToIgnoreCase () methods

Compare strings by using ==

== operator, known under the name of the equality operator is used to compare two strings in Java.

Suppose we are running a coffee shop and we want to compare if a customer’s name matches the one we have associated with a particular order. We could compare these names using the following code:

Our code returns:

Break from Descended our code. First, we declare a class called CompareNames which stores the code for our program. We then declare a variable orderName which stores the name associated with a particular order and a variable called customerName which stores the name of the customer who is looking for their drink.

>

We then use an if statement and the equality operator for before the value of orderName and the value of customerName. line of code that performs this comparison:

If the values ‚Äã‚Äãstored in orderName and customerName are the same, as in this case, the message customer name matches the name of the order. is printed on the console. Otherwise, the message Customer name does not match the order name. is printed on the console.

string Compare objects using ==

In the example above, we have declared two strings and uti Read the == operator to compare them. However, this approach does not work when comparing two string objects.

Here is what happens if we try to compare two string objects using the == operator:

Our code returns:

Even though we assign the string value James to the two string objects, the program does not treat them the same. This is because the program will not compare the value of the strings, but the objects themselves.

In our code, we declared two string objects, each of which has references to different objects. So when we try to compare them using ==, they treat our program as different objects.

Compare strings using equals ()

The Java string The equals () compares two strings in Java

Either backs go to the coffee example. Suppose we want to compare the name we have associated with a coffee order and the name of a customer. We could do it using this code:

Our code returns:

In this example, we are using the equals () to compare the values ‚Äã‚Äãof or rderName and customerName .

We assign the value of equals () to a boolean called AreEqual. If AreEqual true, the console displays a message indicating Customer name matches the name of the order. otherwise, if AreEqual returns false, a message is printed on the console indicating Customer’s name does not match the name of the order. . In this case, orderName and customerName are the same, AreEqual is equal to true.

You can use equalsIgnoreCase () in the same way as equals () to compare strings. The only difference between equals () and equalsIgnoreCase () is that the latter compares two strings regardless of their case, while the former is case sensitive .

If you want to learn more about the equals () string, read our tutorial on the subject.

Compare strings using compareTo ()

The Java compareTo () string method is used to lexicographically compare two strings

compareTo () method compares the Unicode value of each character in the two strings you are comparing. compareTo () returns 0 if the string is equal to the other string, less than 0 if the string has fewer characters than the other string, and greater than 0 if the string has more than characters than the other string.

Suppose we want to ssicographically compare the names of our cafeteria customers with the name we associate with a glass we could do it using this code:

Our code returns:

In this example, our code uses compareTo () to compare the value of customerName with the value of orderName code>, in this case the value of orderName, James, does not match the value of customerName, Bill .

Since orderName has more characters than customerName, our code returns a value greater than 0, equal to the Unicode differences in our two strings.

Additionally, the compareTo () method is case sensitive . If you want to compare lexicographic strings regardless of the character cases in your strings, you can use the compareToIgnoreCase () method. The syntax of the compareTo () method and compareToIgnoreCase () is the same.

Conclusion

Comparing values ‚Äã‚Äãstored in two strings is a common operation in Java.

This tutorial explains how to compare two strings using the equality operator (==), equals () and compareTo () method . We also discussed the limitations of the equality operator when comparing objects. We have also shown an example of each of these methods in action.

You now have the skills to start comparing strings in Java like a professional programmer!

👻 Read also: what is the best laptop for engineering students?

String Equal To Javascript exp: Questions

exp

How do I merge two dictionaries in a single expression (taking union of dictionaries)?

5 answers

Carl Meyer By Carl Meyer

I have two Python dictionaries, and I want to write a single expression that returns these two dictionaries, merged (i.e. taking the union). The update() method would be what I need, if it returned its result instead of modifying a dictionary in-place.

>>> x = {"a": 1, "b": 2}
>>> y = {"b": 10, "c": 11}
>>> z = x.update(y)
>>> print(z)
None
>>> x
{"a": 1, "b": 10, "c": 11}

How can I get that final merged dictionary in z, not x?

(To be extra-clear, the last-one-wins conflict-handling of dict.update() is what I"m looking for as well.)

5839

Answer #1

How can I merge two Python dictionaries in a single expression?

For dictionaries x and y, z becomes a shallowly-merged dictionary with values from y replacing those from x.

  • In Python 3.9.0 or greater (released 17 October 2020): PEP-584, discussed here, was implemented and provides the simplest method:

    z = x | y          # NOTE: 3.9+ ONLY
    
  • In Python 3.5 or greater:

    z = {**x, **y}
    
  • In Python 2, (or 3.4 or lower) write a function:

    def merge_two_dicts(x, y):
        z = x.copy()   # start with keys and values of x
        z.update(y)    # modifies z with keys and values of y
        return z
    

    and now:

    z = merge_two_dicts(x, y)
    

Explanation

Say you have two dictionaries and you want to merge them into a new dictionary without altering the original dictionaries:

x = {"a": 1, "b": 2}
y = {"b": 3, "c": 4}

The desired result is to get a new dictionary (z) with the values merged, and the second dictionary"s values overwriting those from the first.

>>> z
{"a": 1, "b": 3, "c": 4}

A new syntax for this, proposed in PEP 448 and available as of Python 3.5, is

z = {**x, **y}

And it is indeed a single expression.

Note that we can merge in with literal notation as well:

z = {**x, "foo": 1, "bar": 2, **y}

and now:

>>> z
{"a": 1, "b": 3, "foo": 1, "bar": 2, "c": 4}

It is now showing as implemented in the release schedule for 3.5, PEP 478, and it has now made its way into the What"s New in Python 3.5 document.

However, since many organizations are still on Python 2, you may wish to do this in a backward-compatible way. The classically Pythonic way, available in Python 2 and Python 3.0-3.4, is to do this as a two-step process:

z = x.copy()
z.update(y) # which returns None since it mutates z

In both approaches, y will come second and its values will replace x"s values, thus b will point to 3 in our final result.

Not yet on Python 3.5, but want a single expression

If you are not yet on Python 3.5 or need to write backward-compatible code, and you want this in a single expression, the most performant while the correct approach is to put it in a function:

def merge_two_dicts(x, y):
    """Given two dictionaries, merge them into a new dict as a shallow copy."""
    z = x.copy()
    z.update(y)
    return z

and then you have a single expression:

z = merge_two_dicts(x, y)

You can also make a function to merge an arbitrary number of dictionaries, from zero to a very large number:

def merge_dicts(*dict_args):
    """
    Given any number of dictionaries, shallow copy and merge into a new dict,
    precedence goes to key-value pairs in latter dictionaries.
    """
    result = {}
    for dictionary in dict_args:
        result.update(dictionary)
    return result

This function will work in Python 2 and 3 for all dictionaries. e.g. given dictionaries a to g:

z = merge_dicts(a, b, c, d, e, f, g) 

and key-value pairs in g will take precedence over dictionaries a to f, and so on.

Critiques of Other Answers

Don"t use what you see in the formerly accepted answer:

z = dict(x.items() + y.items())

In Python 2, you create two lists in memory for each dict, create a third list in memory with length equal to the length of the first two put together, and then discard all three lists to create the dict. In Python 3, this will fail because you"re adding two dict_items objects together, not two lists -

>>> c = dict(a.items() + b.items())
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: "dict_items" and "dict_items"

and you would have to explicitly create them as lists, e.g. z = dict(list(x.items()) + list(y.items())). This is a waste of resources and computation power.

Similarly, taking the union of items() in Python 3 (viewitems() in Python 2.7) will also fail when values are unhashable objects (like lists, for example). Even if your values are hashable, since sets are semantically unordered, the behavior is undefined in regards to precedence. So don"t do this:

>>> c = dict(a.items() | b.items())

This example demonstrates what happens when values are unhashable:

>>> x = {"a": []}
>>> y = {"b": []}
>>> dict(x.items() | y.items())
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: unhashable type: "list"

Here"s an example where y should have precedence, but instead the value from x is retained due to the arbitrary order of sets:

>>> x = {"a": 2}
>>> y = {"a": 1}
>>> dict(x.items() | y.items())
{"a": 2}

Another hack you should not use:

z = dict(x, **y)

This uses the dict constructor and is very fast and memory-efficient (even slightly more so than our two-step process) but unless you know precisely what is happening here (that is, the second dict is being passed as keyword arguments to the dict constructor), it"s difficult to read, it"s not the intended usage, and so it is not Pythonic.

Here"s an example of the usage being remediated in django.

Dictionaries are intended to take hashable keys (e.g. frozensets or tuples), but this method fails in Python 3 when keys are not strings.

>>> c = dict(a, **b)
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: keyword arguments must be strings

From the mailing list, Guido van Rossum, the creator of the language, wrote:

I am fine with declaring dict({}, **{1:3}) illegal, since after all it is abuse of the ** mechanism.

and

Apparently dict(x, **y) is going around as "cool hack" for "call x.update(y) and return x". Personally, I find it more despicable than cool.

It is my understanding (as well as the understanding of the creator of the language) that the intended usage for dict(**y) is for creating dictionaries for readability purposes, e.g.:

dict(a=1, b=10, c=11)

instead of

{"a": 1, "b": 10, "c": 11}

Response to comments

Despite what Guido says, dict(x, **y) is in line with the dict specification, which btw. works for both Python 2 and 3. The fact that this only works for string keys is a direct consequence of how keyword parameters work and not a short-coming of dict. Nor is using the ** operator in this place an abuse of the mechanism, in fact, ** was designed precisely to pass dictionaries as keywords.

Again, it doesn"t work for 3 when keys are not strings. The implicit calling contract is that namespaces take ordinary dictionaries, while users must only pass keyword arguments that are strings. All other callables enforced it. dict broke this consistency in Python 2:

>>> foo(**{("a", "b"): None})
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: foo() keywords must be strings
>>> dict(**{("a", "b"): None})
{("a", "b"): None}

This inconsistency was bad given other implementations of Python (PyPy, Jython, IronPython). Thus it was fixed in Python 3, as this usage could be a breaking change.

I submit to you that it is malicious incompetence to intentionally write code that only works in one version of a language or that only works given certain arbitrary constraints.

More comments:

dict(x.items() + y.items()) is still the most readable solution for Python 2. Readability counts.

My response: merge_two_dicts(x, y) actually seems much clearer to me, if we"re actually concerned about readability. And it is not forward compatible, as Python 2 is increasingly deprecated.

{**x, **y} does not seem to handle nested dictionaries. the contents of nested keys are simply overwritten, not merged [...] I ended up being burnt by these answers that do not merge recursively and I was surprised no one mentioned it. In my interpretation of the word "merging" these answers describe "updating one dict with another", and not merging.

Yes. I must refer you back to the question, which is asking for a shallow merge of two dictionaries, with the first"s values being overwritten by the second"s - in a single expression.

Assuming two dictionaries of dictionaries, one might recursively merge them in a single function, but you should be careful not to modify the dictionaries from either source, and the surest way to avoid that is to make a copy when assigning values. As keys must be hashable and are usually therefore immutable, it is pointless to copy them:

from copy import deepcopy

def dict_of_dicts_merge(x, y):
    z = {}
    overlapping_keys = x.keys() & y.keys()
    for key in overlapping_keys:
        z[key] = dict_of_dicts_merge(x[key], y[key])
    for key in x.keys() - overlapping_keys:
        z[key] = deepcopy(x[key])
    for key in y.keys() - overlapping_keys:
        z[key] = deepcopy(y[key])
    return z

Usage:

>>> x = {"a":{1:{}}, "b": {2:{}}}
>>> y = {"b":{10:{}}, "c": {11:{}}}
>>> dict_of_dicts_merge(x, y)
{"b": {2: {}, 10: {}}, "a": {1: {}}, "c": {11: {}}}

Coming up with contingencies for other value types is far beyond the scope of this question, so I will point you at my answer to the canonical question on a "Dictionaries of dictionaries merge".

Less Performant But Correct Ad-hocs

These approaches are less performant, but they will provide correct behavior. They will be much less performant than copy and update or the new unpacking because they iterate through each key-value pair at a higher level of abstraction, but they do respect the order of precedence (latter dictionaries have precedence)

You can also chain the dictionaries manually inside a dict comprehension:

{k: v for d in dicts for k, v in d.items()} # iteritems in Python 2.7

or in Python 2.6 (and perhaps as early as 2.4 when generator expressions were introduced):

dict((k, v) for d in dicts for k, v in d.items()) # iteritems in Python 2

itertools.chain will chain the iterators over the key-value pairs in the correct order:

from itertools import chain
z = dict(chain(x.items(), y.items())) # iteritems in Python 2

Performance Analysis

I"m only going to do the performance analysis of the usages known to behave correctly. (Self-contained so you can copy and paste yourself.)

from timeit import repeat
from itertools import chain

x = dict.fromkeys("abcdefg")
y = dict.fromkeys("efghijk")

def merge_two_dicts(x, y):
    z = x.copy()
    z.update(y)
    return z

min(repeat(lambda: {**x, **y}))
min(repeat(lambda: merge_two_dicts(x, y)))
min(repeat(lambda: {k: v for d in (x, y) for k, v in d.items()}))
min(repeat(lambda: dict(chain(x.items(), y.items()))))
min(repeat(lambda: dict(item for d in (x, y) for item in d.items())))

In Python 3.8.1, NixOS:

>>> min(repeat(lambda: {**x, **y}))
1.0804965235292912
>>> min(repeat(lambda: merge_two_dicts(x, y)))
1.636518670246005
>>> min(repeat(lambda: {k: v for d in (x, y) for k, v in d.items()}))
3.1779992282390594
>>> min(repeat(lambda: dict(chain(x.items(), y.items()))))
2.740647904574871
>>> min(repeat(lambda: dict(item for d in (x, y) for item in d.items())))
4.266070580109954
$ uname -a
Linux nixos 4.19.113 #1-NixOS SMP Wed Mar 25 07:06:15 UTC 2020 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Resources on Dictionaries

5839

Answer #2

In your case, what you can do is:

z = dict(list(x.items()) + list(y.items()))

This will, as you want it, put the final dict in z, and make the value for key b be properly overridden by the second (y) dict"s value:

>>> x = {"a":1, "b": 2}
>>> y = {"b":10, "c": 11}
>>> z = dict(list(x.items()) + list(y.items()))
>>> z
{"a": 1, "c": 11, "b": 10}

If you use Python 2, you can even remove the list() calls. To create z:

>>> z = dict(x.items() + y.items())
>>> z
{"a": 1, "c": 11, "b": 10}

If you use Python version 3.9.0a4 or greater, then you can directly use:

x = {"a":1, "b": 2}
y = {"b":10, "c": 11}
z = x | y
print(z)
{"a": 1, "c": 11, "b": 10}

5839

Answer #3

An alternative:

z = x.copy()
z.update(y)

iat

InsecurePlatformWarning: A true SSLContext object is not available. This prevents urllib3 from configuring SSL appropriately

3 answers

Tried to perform REST GET through python requests with the following code and I got error.

Code snip:

import requests
header = {"Authorization": "Bearer..."}
url = az_base_url + az_subscription_id + "/resourcegroups/Default-Networking/resources?" + az_api_version
r = requests.get(url, headers=header)

Error:

/usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/requests/packages/urllib3/util/ssl_.py:79: 
          InsecurePlatformWarning: A true SSLContext object is not available. 
          This prevents urllib3 from configuring SSL appropriately and may cause certain SSL connections to fail. 
          For more information, see https://urllib3.readthedocs.org/en/latest/security.html#insecureplatformwarning.
  InsecurePlatformWarning

My python version is 2.7.3. I tried to install urllib3 and requests[security] as some other thread suggests, I still got the same error.

Wonder if anyone can provide some tips?

334

Answer #1

The docs give a fair indicator of what"s required., however requests allow us to skip a few steps:

You only need to install the security package extras (thanks @admdrew for pointing it out)

$ pip install requests[security]

or, install them directly:

$ pip install pyopenssl ndg-httpsclient pyasn1

Requests will then automatically inject pyopenssl into urllib3


If you"re on ubuntu, you may run into trouble installing pyopenssl, you"ll need these dependencies:

$ apt-get install libffi-dev libssl-dev

iat

Dynamic instantiation from string name of a class in dynamically imported module?

3 answers

In python, I have to instantiate certain class, knowing its name in a string, but this class "lives" in a dynamically imported module. An example follows:

loader-class script:

import sys
class loader:
  def __init__(self, module_name, class_name): # both args are strings
    try:
      __import__(module_name)
      modul = sys.modules[module_name]
      instance = modul.class_name() # obviously this doesn"t works, here is my main problem!
    except ImportError:
       # manage import error

some-dynamically-loaded-module script:

class myName:
  # etc...

I use this arrangement to make any dynamically-loaded-module to be used by the loader-class following certain predefined behaviours in the dyn-loaded-modules...

222

Answer #1

You can use getattr

getattr(module, class_name)

to access the class. More complete code:

module = __import__(module_name)
class_ = getattr(module, class_name)
instance = class_()

As mentioned below, we may use importlib

import importlib
module = importlib.import_module(module_name)
class_ = getattr(module, class_name)
instance = class_()

iat

How to get all of the immediate subdirectories in Python

3 answers

I"m trying to write a simple Python script that will copy a index.tpl to index.html in all of the subdirectories (with a few exceptions).

I"m getting bogged down by trying to get the list of subdirectories.

184

Answer #1

import os
def get_immediate_subdirectories(a_dir):
    return [name for name in os.listdir(a_dir)
            if os.path.isdir(os.path.join(a_dir, name))]

We hope this article has helped you to resolve the problem. Apart from String Equal To Javascript, check other exp-related topics.

Want to excel in Python? See our review of the best Python online courses 2022. If you are interested in Data Science, check also how to learn programming in R.

By the way, this material is also available in other languages:



Chen Chamberlet

Shanghai | 2022-12-01

Maybe there are another answers? What String Equal To Javascript exactly means?. Will use it in my bachelor thesis

Carlo Jackson

Munchen | 2022-12-01

iat is always a bit confusing 😭 String Equal To Javascript is not the only problem I encountered. I am just not quite sure it is the best method

Davies Wu

Warsaw | 2022-12-01

I was preparing for my coding interview, thanks for clarifying this - String Equal To Javascript in Python is not the simplest one. I just hope that will not emerge anymore

Shop

Learn programming in R: courses

$

Best Python online courses for 2022

$

Best laptop for Fortnite

$

Best laptop for Excel

$

Best laptop for Solidworks

$

Best laptop for Roblox

$

Best computer for crypto mining

$

Best laptop for Sims 4

$

Latest questions

NUMPYNUMPY

Common xlabel/ylabel for matplotlib subplots

12 answers

NUMPYNUMPY

How to specify multiple return types using type-hints

12 answers

NUMPYNUMPY

Why do I get "Pickle - EOFError: Ran out of input" reading an empty file?

12 answers

NUMPYNUMPY

Flake8: Ignore specific warning for entire file

12 answers

NUMPYNUMPY

glob exclude pattern

12 answers

NUMPYNUMPY

How to avoid HTTP error 429 (Too Many Requests) python

12 answers

NUMPYNUMPY

Python CSV error: line contains NULL byte

12 answers

NUMPYNUMPY

csv.Error: iterator should return strings, not bytes

12 answers

News


Wiki

Python | How to copy data from one Excel sheet to another

Common xlabel/ylabel for matplotlib subplots

Check if one list is a subset of another in Python

sin

How to specify multiple return types using type-hints

exp

Printing words vertically in Python

exp

Python Extract words from a given string

Cyclic redundancy check in Python

Finding mean, median, mode in Python without libraries

cos

Python add suffix / add prefix to strings in a list

Why do I get "Pickle - EOFError: Ran out of input" reading an empty file?

Python - Move item to the end of the list

Python - Print list vertically