Hello,

As I said in the previous post that I have started learning Rust and made a simple fibonacci series generator. Today I made a palindrome string checker. it’s very basic. I haven’t used Enum or Struct in the code since I don’t think it’s necessary in this simple code.

here is the code:

use std::io;

fn main() {
    let mut input = String::new();
    let stdin = io::stdin();
    stdin.read_line(&mut input).unwrap(); // we want to exit in case it couldn't read from stdin

    input = input.replace("\n", ""); // Removing newline

    let mut is_palindrome: bool = true;
    for i in 0..input.len()/2 {
        let first_char: &str = &input[i..i+1];
        let last_char: &str = &input[input.len()-i-1..input.len()-i];
        if first_char != "\n" {
            if first_char != last_char {
                is_palindrome = false;
            }
        }
    }

    println!("palindrome: {}", is_palindrome);
}
  • Solemarc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    I didn’t see it mentioned but you could remove all trailing & leading whitespace with:

    input = input.trim();
    

    Instead of using replace.

  • Flipper@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    10 hours ago

    There is a much nicer way of checking.

    Rust iterators are really powerful. Try using them instead of loops, whenever you can.

    Tap for solution
    let is_palindrome = input.chars().eq(input.chars().rev());
    

    As you can see, the intent is much clearer instead of indexing into the loops. Technically this does however twice as many comparisons. They can be avoided with take and half the size of the iterator.

    • FizzyOrange@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 hours ago

      You only need to check half of the string, so I think a technically optimal solution would have some take_while and maybe char_indices in there…

      • Flipper@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 hours ago

        That’s exactly what I Hinted at in my post, though I would use take(input.size()/2). However I wouldn’t be surprised if the compiler could short circuit it, but I haven’t checked.

        • FizzyOrange@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Oh yeah I can’t read 😄

          I would be extremely surprised if any compiler was smart enough to short circuit that.

          I would be a little less surprised if checking the whole string was actually faster anyway though… but I would still bet against it.

    • whoareuOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      let is_palindrome = input.chars().eq(input.chars().rev());

      wow, this is really awesome. you just made a single liner for this whole problem. I didn’t know that you could do something like this since I don’t know much about Rust yet.

  • FizzyOrange@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Aside from the better solution with iterators that Flipper mentioned, you can also:

    • Omit the type annotation for is_palindrome - it will be inferred as bool anyway
    • break; after setting is_palindrome = false
    • Use the (0..input.len()/2).all(|i| ...) iterator method instead.
    • whoareuOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Thank you for the suggestion, I will keep these in mind.

  • BB_C@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Such posts are more suitable as microblogs IMHO.

    Anyway, string lengths are byte lengths, and indexing strings is actually not panic-safe. This is why we have (still-nightly) char-boundary methods now.

    If you want to work on characters. use .chars().count() and .chars().nth().

    And character boundaries are themselves not always grapheme boundaries, which is also something that you might need to keep in mind when you start writing serious code.

    With all that in mind, you should realize, for example, that probably every string reversing beginner exercise answer in every language is actually wrong. And the wrongness may actually start at the underspecified requirements 😉

  • TehPers@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    That’s a fun problem! Good for getting used to how to do loops in Rust.

    One thing that might be interesting is to try to do it with iterators as well. You can make a really concise solution (link is a spoiler if you plan to do this yourself) using them.