Tried changing around the for loop condition several times, still get ArrayIndexOutOfBounds when I pass zero as a parameter. Every other number works fine, I am trying to account for zero by setting it equal to zero automatically, am I doing that part incorrectly? Everything compiles and runs fine except for zero.
private static int iterativeCalculation(int userEntry)
{
int iterativeArray[] = new int[userEntry + 1];
iterativeArray[0] = 0;
iterativeArray[1] = 1;
for (int i = 2; i <= userEntry; i++)
{
iterativeArray[i] = (3 * iterativeArray[i - 1]) - (2 * iterativeArray[i - 2]);
iterativeEfficiencyCounter++;
}
return iterativeArray[userEntry];
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(iterativeCalculation(0));
}
Tried debugging my way through the code, still not understanding what is going wrong. Would appreciate any help! Thanks!
When you pass zero as parameter, userEntry + 1 = 1.
But here:
iterativeArray[1] = 1;
You are trying to set the second element's value. Remember that length of array is one less than its actual size. So removing this line will fix it. Or use userEntry + 2 instead and alter your loop accordingly.
EDIT:
If you really want to fix first and second element, then use this instead:
int iterativeArray[] = new int[userEntry + 2];
iterativeArray[0] = 0;
iterativeArray[1] = 1;
This will create an array of adequate base size.
And remember, length you enter in [...] while creating array has to be one more than the actual length you want. Because actual array starts counting from 0.
In your case, you were setting length as 1 (minimum). That would create an array which can store only one element; that is iterativeArray[0] = //something. Anything above that is OutOfBounds.
You are setting iterativeArray[1] = 1; regardless of whether or not there are actually 2 or more items in the array. That will be out of bounds with one element.
I think you should step through the code in debugger to best understand what the problem is. You'll see exactly where it's got a problem if you single-step through the code. This is a fundamental technique and tool.
Related
I am passing some parameters in the URL and then I add them in a list. My list has a limit of 5 elements. So if someone adds 6th element in the URL the list would simply ignore it. So I am trying to use a counter but the logic is not working as desired. I am using While loop to achieve this. So if list size is smaller than 5 set the agencyCds otherwise just return the list.
private List<IUiIntegrationDto> generateViewIntegrationReportData(ESignatureIntegrationConfig eSignConfig) throws Exception {
int counter = 1;
if(eSignConfig.getAdditionalAgencyCds() != null ) {
List<String> combinedAgencyCds = new ArrayList<String>();
for(String agencyCd : eSignConfig.getAgencyCd()) {
combinedAgencyCds.add(agencyCd);
}
StringTokenizer token = new StringTokenizer(eSignConfig.getAdditionalAgencyCds().toString(), StringConstants.COMMA);
while(token.hasMoreTokens()) {
combinedAgencyCds.add(token.nextToken());
}
while(combinedAgencyCds.size() < 5) {
counter = counter + 1;
eSignConfig.setAgencyCd(combinedAgencyCds);
}
// eSignConfig.setAgencyCd(combinedAgencyCds);
}
List<IUiIntegrationDto> intgList = getUiIntegrationManager().retrieveUiIntegrationReportData(eSignConfig.getAgencyCd(), eSignConfig.getCreatedDays(),
eSignConfig.getLob(), eSignConfig.getTransactionStatus(), eSignConfig.getAccounts(), eSignConfig.getSortKey(), eSignConfig.getSortOrder());
return intgList;
}
I am not completely sure about this logic if it is correct or if there is nay better approach.
Thanks
Try this instead of the last while in your code:
if(combinedAgencyCds.size() <= 5) {
eSignConfig.setAgencyCd(combinedAgencyCds);
} else {
eSignConfig.setAgencyCd(combinedAgencyCds.subList(0, 5));
}
The full combined list will then be used if it is less than 5 in size. Otherwise, only the first 5 elements are used.
Edit: Or even better:
eSignConfig.setAgencyCd(combinedAgencyCds.subList(0, Math.min(5, combinedAgencyCds.size())));
Ok so let's break down what your code is currently doing.
int counter = 1;
while(combinedAgencyCds.size() < 5) {
counter = counter + 1;
eSignConfig.setAgencyCd(combinedAgencyCds);
}
This snippet of code has a couple things wrong best I can tell. First, this loop has the possibility of running forever or not at all. Because combinedAgencyCds is never being manipulated, the size won't ever change and the logic being checked in the while loop never does anything. Second, there's a more efficient loop for doing this, assuming you don't need the counter variable outside of its usage in the while loop and that is using for loops.
Example syntax is as follows:
for (int i = 0; i < combinedAgencyCds.size(); i++) {
if (i < 5) {
// Do your logic here.
}
else {
break; // Or handle extra values however you want.
}
}
Notice there is no need for the explicit declaration for a counter variable as "i" counts for you.
Now in your actual logic in the loop, I'm not sure what the setAgencyCd method does, but if it simply sets a list variable in the eSignConfig like it appears to, repeating it over and over isn't going to do anything. From what I can see in your code, you are setting a variable with the same value 5 times. If you need any more explanation just let me know and I will be happy to revise the answer.
I'm new to stack overflow so sorry for anything that might consider me a newbie.
I understand java to a certain degree, however, i am stuck on one thing i hope you guys can help me on.
I am in the process of making a floating point simulator and i am struggling on this section of the code.
I need the next part of the array [1] to reach the total length of the mantissa my knowledge with arrays in java are not exactly the best so any help would be much appreciated.
Thanks
public float toDecimal()
{
/**
* Convert Exponent and find shift
*/
char[] mantissaCharArray = mantissa.toCharArray();
int mantissaLength = mantissaCharArray.length;
float[] mantissaMultiplierArray = new float[mantissaLength];
mantissaMultiplierArray[0]= 1;
for (mantissaMultiplierArray[1];mantissaCharArray;mantissaMultiplierArray++)
{
//for loop to cover array from [1] to the lengthmantissa
}
//each one multiply current
}
Try this,
for (int i=(int)mantissaMultiplierArray[0];i< mantissaCharArray.length;i++)
{
//
}
mantissaMultiplierArray[0] will return float value.
So you want to run through each element of an array? You are right with the for loop, just wrote it wrong. It should go something like this;
for(int i = (int)mantissaMultiplierArray[0]; i < mantissaCharArray.length; i++)
{
System.out.println(mantissaMultiplierArray[i]);
}
Let me explain the setup of this for loop a bit more;
You are setting an integer value i to the first value of mantissaMultiplierArray. You are also parsing it as an int because it is a float, hence the (int)
You give i a limitation - the total size of the mantissaCharArray
increment i
In the for loop I have it set to print out the values of the mantissaMultiplierArray for each value of i, but yu can do whatever you want inside of it.
I'm trying to do a homework assignment. I have to use dynamic programming to display whether the next person to move is in a win/loss state. I don't need help with the actual problem, I need help with an index out of bounds exception I'm getting that baffles me. I'm only going to paste part of my code here, because I only need the for loops looked at. I also don't want anyone in my class seeing all my code and copying it. If you need more data please let me know. So here is the code:
if(primeArray[x] == true){
for(int i = 1; i <= x; i++){
if(primeArray[i]== true){
newRowNumber = x - i;
}
if(dynaProgram[newRowNumber][columnNumber] < minimum){
minimum = dynaProgram[newRowNumber][columnNumber];
}
}
}
//COMPOSITE CASE FOR X!
else{
for(int k = 1; k <= x; k++){
if((primeArray[k] == false)){
newRowNumber = x - k;
}
if(dynaProgram[newRowNumber][columnNumber] < minimum){
minimum = dynaProgram[newRowNumber][columnNumber];
}
}
For some reason the if(primeArray[i] == true runs correctly, but I'm getting index out of bounds exception on if(primeArray[k] == false. The only difference between these two is the use of the variable k over i in the for loop.(the for loops are identical) I haven't used either variables anywhere else in my code. I have no idea why this occurs for one but not the other. In both cases, x remains the same number.
I am also getting an index out of bounds exception on the second minimum = dynaProgram[newRowNumber][columnNumber], while the first doesn't encounter an error. I know it's probably a stupid error, but I can't figure it out. If I change the 'k' for loop to k < x the index of out bounds exception in the if(primeArray[k] == false line goes away, but then it isn't correct. (The error on the second minimum = dynaProgram[newRowNumber][columnNumber] doesn't go away however.)
All this code is in a nested for loop which iterates through the rows and columns in the table to fill them in. If I remove the above code and just put dynaProgram[rowNumber][columnNumber] = 1 I don't have an issue, so I don't believe that is the problem.
When accessing an array of length 5 (for example)
int[] fred = new int[5];
the first element will be fred[0] and the last will be fred[4]
So when doing something like:
if(primeArray[i]== true){
Make sure that i is less than the array length. Using a value of i equal to the array length will throw an exception.
Hey guys, recently posted up about a problem with my algorithm.
Finding the numbers from a set which give the minimum amount of waste
Ive amended the code slightly, so it now backtracks to an extent, however the output is still flawed. Ive debugged this considerablychecking all the variable values and cant seem to find out the issue.
Again advice as opposed to an outright solution would be of great help. I think there is only a couple of problems with my code, but i cant work out where.
//from previous post:
Basically a set is passed to this method below, and a length of a bar is also passed in. The solution should output the numbers from the set which give the minimum amount of waste if certain numbers from the set were removed from the bar length. So, bar length 10, set includes 6,1,4, so the solution is 6 and 4, and the wastage is 0. Im having some trouble with the conditions to backtrack though the set. Ive also tried to use a wastage "global" variable to help with the backtracking aspect but to no avail.
SetInt is a manually made set implementation, which can add, remove, check if the set is empty and return the minimum value from the set.
/*
* To change this template, choose Tools | Templates
* and open the template in the editor.
*/
package recursivebacktracking;
/**
*
* #author User
*/
public class RecBack {
int WASTAGE = 10;
int BESTWASTAGE;
int BARLENGTH = 10;
public void work()
{
int[] nums = {6,1,2,5};
//Order Numbers
SetInt ORDERS = new SetInt(nums.length);
SetInt BESTSET = new SetInt(nums.length);
SetInt SOLUTION = new SetInt(nums.length);
//Set Declarration
for (int item : nums)ORDERS.add(item);
//Populate Set
SetInt result = tryCutting(ORDERS, SOLUTION, BARLENGTH, WASTAGE);
result.printNumbers();
}
public SetInt tryCutting(SetInt possibleOrders, SetInt solution, int lengthleft, int waste)
{
for (int i = 0; i < possibleOrders.numberInSet(); i++) // the repeat
{
int a = possibleOrders.min(); //select next candidate
System.out.println(a);
if (a <= lengthleft) //if accecptable
{
solution.add(a); //record candidate
lengthleft -= a;
WASTAGE = lengthleft;
possibleOrders.remove(a); //remove from original set
if (!possibleOrders.isEmpty()) //solution not complete
{
System.out.println("this time");
tryCutting(possibleOrders, solution, lengthleft, waste);//try recursive call
BESTWASTAGE = WASTAGE;
if ( BESTWASTAGE <= WASTAGE )//if not successfull
{
lengthleft += a;
solution.remove(a);
System.out.println("never happens");
}
} //solution not complete
}
} //for loop
return solution;
}
}
Instead of using backtracking, have you considered using a bitmask algorithm instead? I think it would make your algorithm much simpler.
Here's an outline of how you would do this:
Let N be number of elements in your set. So if the set is {6,1,2,5} then N would be 4. Let max_waste be the maximum waste we can eliminate (10 in your example).
int best = 0; // the best result so far
for (int mask = 1; mask <= (1<<N)-1; ++mask) {
// loop over each bit in the mask to see if it's set and add to the sum
int sm = 0;
for (int j = 0; j < N; ++j) {
if ( ((1<<j)&mask) != 0) {
// the bit is set, add this amount to the total
sm += your_set[j];
// possible optimization: if sm is greater than max waste, then break
// out of loop since there's no need to continue
}
}
// if sm <= max_waste, then see if this result produces a better one
// that our current best, and store accordingly
if (sm <= max_waste) {
best = max(max_waste - sm);
}
}
This algorithm is very similar to backtracking and has similar complexity, it just doesn't use recursion.
The bitmask basically is a binary representation where 1 indicates that we use the item in the set, and 0 means we don't. Since we are looping from 1 to (1<<N)-1, we are considering all possible subsets of the given items.
Note that running time of this algorithm increases very quickly as N gets larger, but with N <= around 20 it should be ok. The same limitation applies with backtracking, by the way. If you need faster performance, you'd need to consider another technique like dynamic programming.
For the backtracking, you just need to keep track of which element in the set you are on, and you either try to use the element or not use it. If you use it, you add it to your total, and if not, you proceeed to the next recursive call without increasing your total. Then, you decrement the total (if you incremented it), which is where the backtracking comes in.
It's very similar to the bitmask approach above, and I provided the bitmask solution to help give you a better understanding of how the backtracking algorithm would work.
EDIT
OK, I didn't realize you were required to use recursion.
Hint1
First, I think you can simplify your code considerably by just using a single recursive function and putting the logic in that function. There's no need to build all the sets ahead of time then process them (I'm not totally sure that's what you're doing but it seems that way from your code). You can just build the sets and then keep track of where you are in the set. When you get to the end of the set, see if your result is better.
Hint2
If you still need more hints, try to think of what your backtracking function should be doing. What are the terminating conditions? When we reach the terminating condition, what do we need to record (e.g. did we get a new best result, etc.)?
Hint3
Spoiler Alert
Below is a C++ implementation to give you some ideas, so stop reading here if you want to work on it some more by yourself.
int bestDiff = 999999999;
int N;
vector< int > cur_items;
int cur_tot = 0;
int items[] = {6,1,2,5};
vector< int > best_items;
int max_waste;
void go(int at) {
if (cur_tot > max_waste)
// we've exceeded max_waste, so no need to continue
return;
if (at == N) {
// we're at the end of the input, see if we got a better result and
// if so, record it
if (max_waste - cur_tot < bestDiff) {
bestDiff = max_waste - cur_tot;
best_items = cur_items;
}
return;
}
// use this item
cur_items.push_back(items[at]);
cur_tot += items[at];
go(at+1);
// here's the backtracking part
cur_tot -= items[at];
cur_items.pop_back();
// don't use this item
go(at+1);
}
int main() {
// 4 items in the set, so N is 4
N=4;
// maximum waste we can eliminiate is 10
max_waste = 10;
// call the backtracking algo
go(0);
// output the results
cout<<"bestDiff = "<<bestDiff<<endl;
cout<<"The items are:"<<endl;
for (int i = 0; i < best_items.size(); ++i) {
cout<<best_items[i]<<" ";
}
return 0;
}
I'll try to explain this as best I can. I have an ArrayList of String's. I am trying to implement server-side paging for a webapp. I am restricted to the number of items per page (6 in this case) which are read from this ArrayList. The ArrayList is, lets say, the entire catalog, and each page will take a section of it to populate the page. I can get this working just fine when there are enough elements to fill the particular page, its when we hit the end of the ArrayList where there will be less than 6 items remaining for that pages segment. How can I check if the ArrayList is on its last element, or if the next one doesn't exist? I have the following code (in pseudo-ish code):
int enterArrayListAtElement = (numberOfItemsPerPage * (requestedPageNumber - 1));
for (int i = 0; i < numberOfItemsPerPage; i++) {
if (!completeCatalog.get(enterArrayListAtElement + i).isEmpty() {
completeCatalog.get(enterArrayListAtElement + i);
}
}
The if in the code is the problem. Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
It sounds like you want:
if (enterArrayListAtElement + i < completeCatalog.size())
That will stop you from trying to fetch values beyond the end of the list.
If that's the case, you may want to change the bounds of the for loop to something like:
int actualCount = Math.min(numberOfItemsPerPage,
completeCatalog.size() - enterArrayListAtElement);
for (int i = 0; i < actualCount; i++) {
// Stuff
}
(You may find this somewhat easier to format if you use shorter names, e.g. firstIndex instead of enterArrayListAtElement and pageSize instead of numberOfItemsPerPage.)
Can't you just get
completeCatalog.size()
and compare it to i? i.e to answer the question "is there an ith element" you say
if (i<completeCatalog.size())
You just need to add a second expression to look whether the end of the list was reached already:
int enterArrayListAtElement = (numberOfItemsPerPage * (requestedPageNumber - 1));
for (int i = 0; i < numberOfItemsPerPage; i++) {
if (enterArrayListAtElement + i < completeCatalog.size() && !completeCatalog.get(enterArrayListAtElement + i).isEmpty() {
completeCatalog.get(enterArrayListAtElement + i);
}
}
An ArrayList has the method of size(), which returns the number of elements within the List.
Therefore, you can use this within the if statement to check you've not went too far.
For example,
if(enterArrayListAtElement + i < completeCatalog.size()) {
...
}