I'm trying to convert the string "127.0" to an integer.
I tried this function:
int getInt(string numStr)
{
int result;
int.TryParse(numStr, out result);
return result;
}
But when I call it as int x = getInt("127.0"); then int.TryParse() sets result to 0.
When I rewrite the function like this:
int getInt(string numStr)
{
result=Convert.ToInt32(numStr);
return result;
}
the same getInt() call throws this exception:
Input string was not in a correct format.
The issue here is that "127.0" is not an integer, it's a floating point number. You will need to parse it using one of the other floating point types (i.e. double, float, Decimal, etc.).
You may want to consider either stripping off any values after the decimal point and attempting to parse it, or parsing it as another type and casting it as an integer :
int result = (int)Convert.ToDouble("1.270");
You could also take advantage of the Math.Truncate() function which would give you the integer portion of your value :
int result = (int)Math.Truncate(Convert.ToDouble("127.0"));
First off, you need to check the return value of int.TryParse(). If it returns false, then the string could not be converted.
Had you done that, you would see it returned false because 127.0 does not describe an integer value (it describes a floating point value).
Note that decimal.TryParse() would succeed here. You need to figure out if you need an integer or floating point value, and reject data that is incorrect.
An int cannot contain a decimal point; that makes it either a double, a float, or a decimal. Try to pull the number minus anything from the decimal point over to the right, like this:
int getInt(string numStr)
{
int result;
string[] splitup;
string number;
if (numstr.Contains('.'))
{
splitup = numstr.Split('.');
number = splitup[0];
int.TryParse(number, out result);
}
else
{
int.TryParse(numstr, out result);
}
return result;
}
Rion Williams is absolutely correct, IMHO.
Along with the fact that what you are parsing is not an integer, I'd personally use the TryParse method. Many of the .NET types have it, and it's quite a bit "safer" (it won't throw exceptions) than just parsing a string.
Example:
string stringValue = "127.0";
int intValue;
if(Int32.TryParse(stringValue, out intValue))
{
// return value
}
// handle the failure
If you don't like that, I'd wrap it in a try-catch...
Related
I've been struggling to get my head around a natural way of using TryParse because I keep expecting it to work the other way around (i.e. to return the parsed value and emit the boolean for whether the input parsed).
For example, if we take a basic implementation of Parse, the return value is the parsed input:
int parsedValue = int.Parse(input);
This works fine until it gets a value that it can't parse, at which point it entirely reasonably throws an exception. To me, the option then is either to wrap the parse in something like a try-catch block to handle the exception and a condition to set a default, or just to use TryParse to let C# do all that for me. Except that's not how TryParse works. The above example now looks like this:
bool parseSucceeded = int.TryParse(input, out int parsedValue);
To get it to assign in the same way as Parse, I wrap it in a ternary conditional with parsedValue and a default value (in this case, 0) as the true and false results respectively:
int parsedValue = int.TryParse(input, out parsedValue) ? parsedValue : 0;
But I still feel like I'm missing the point with TryParse if I'm just working around its default behaviour like this. I've read Tim Schmelter's excellent answer in which he shows its internal workings, from which I can suppose that it returns the boolean because it's easier internally than passing it out at all the various places that it currently returns. But I'm not sure about this, and I'm not satisfied that I understand its intent correctly. I also tried reading the documentation for it, but the remarks don't clear up my confusion (I don't think they even make its differences with Parse clear enough, like the change in return type).
Am I understanding it correctly, or am I missing something?
Sure, it could have been implemented as
int TryParse(string input, out bool succeeded)
{
}
But as mentioned in a comment, the common use case for the function is:
string input;
int parsedValue;
if(int.TryParse(input, out parsedValue))
{
// use parsedValue here
}
With the signature you propose, that code would now be:
string input;
bool succeeded;
int parsedValue = int.TryParse(input, out succeeded)
if(succeeded)
{
// use parsedValue here
}
So there's more code for no functional benefit. Also, with your ternary operator, if the parse fails you just set a value of zero, which is unnecessary since the default value of it is 0. You could just do:
int parsedValue;
int.TryParse(input, out parsedValue);
If the parse fails, parsedValue will have a value of 0; (I also question if/how you distinguish between an actual result of 0 and a failed parse, but I'm sure you have a reason).
So there's no technical reason why the signature is the way it is; it's a design decision that is appropriate for the most common use cases.
Of course, now with tuples in C# 7 you could have:
(int parsedValue, bool succeeded) = int.TryParse(input);
but again there's little functional benefit and prevents you from inlining the TryParse in an if statement.
Because logically you would want to check that the TryParse succeeded before trying to use the out value.
So this is more concise:
if (int.TryParse(input, out int parsedValue)}
{
// Do something with parsedValue
}
Than this:
int parsedValue = int.TryParse(input, out bool succeded);
if (succeeded)
{
// Do something with parsedValue
}
I think, a large part of your confusion stems from the method name isn't named exactly right:
int parsedValue = int.Parse("42");
This makes perfect sense, give me the integeger representation of a string.
int parsedValue = int.TryParse(input);
This makes sense as an extension of the concept: Input might be '42' or 'Oswald', but if it's a number I want that number.
In 2020, I think a better name would be CanParse(string input, out int result).
It better matches style guides and naming conventions, where returning a bool should be named with Is, Has, or Can.
It better matches how we use TryParse 99% of the time:
if (int.CanParse(input, out int result))
{
return result * 10;
}
But where I feel the current name makes sense, is the problem I assume it was trying to solve: To get rid of the following boilerplate code:
int result;
bool hasValidNumber = false;
try
{
result = int.Parse(input);
hasValidNumber = true;
}
catch
{
// swallow this exception
}
if (hasValidNumber)
{
// do things with result
}
else
{
// use a default or other logic
}
I have an int and a double, but as soon as I try to subtract the integer from the double, the following error is thrown:
Input string was not in a correct format.
Now lets look at the code:
double TotalNoRegis = values.Sum(); // This is a LIST and its = 1569
string otherFe ="600";
double totalafter;
if(otherFe != string.Empty || otherFe!= "") // This part works fine
{
totalafter = TotalNoRegis - Convert.ToInt32(otherFe); // Here the error is thrown
}
What am I doing wrong here? I looked at this Example, which is basically the same thing: int x = 1 and int y = 2 and then int this = x-y;
Please let me know if you know the issue here.
What am I doing wrong here?
Lots.
if(otherFe != string.Empty || otherFe!= "") // This part works fine
That's nonsensical code. string.Empty and "" are the same string.
Instead use
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(otherFe))
Moving on:
totalafter = TotalNoRegis - Convert.ToInt32(otherFe); // Here the error is thrown
You claim that the error is the subtraction, but it is not. The problem is in the ToInt32. You are passing some other string than the one you are showing.
The way I like to do this is by making an extension method:
static public class Extensions
{
public static int? ParseAsInteger(this string s) {
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(s)) return null;
int i;
return int.TryParse(s, out i) ? (int?)i : (int?)null;
}
// Similarly write `ParseAsDouble` and so on.
}
Now you have an extension you can use:
double? totalAfter = TotalNoRegis - otherFe.ParseAsInteger();
(Or ParseAsDouble, or whatever.)
If otherFe was valid, then totalAfter has the total; if it was not, then it is null.
The lesson here is: move the type conversion logic into its own method which you can independently test. Then the logic at the call site of that method becomes simpler and easier to follow.
You should use an integer instead of a double, especially if you don't have a reason to use the double. So to rectify, you could simply do the following.
int total = values.Sum();
var other = "6000";
if(!string.IsNullOrEmpty(other))
if(int.TryParse(other, out int subtractor))
total -= subtractor;
If you require a double, then use but if you don't why bother? Also, you are subtracting fifteen hundred items from six thousand, your total after will always be negative or often be negative. Is that your desired intent?
Something to note, with the TryParse if it fails it'll skip the subtraction rather than fail like parse or convert would do. Also do you want the sum of the list or count?
I'm trying to parse user entered text into a float so that I can perform some wicked awesome math on the result. The result being the numberA variable at the end there. This is how I'm parsing the string into a float:
numberAString = GUI.TextField(new Rect(25, 100, 100, 25), numberAString.ToString());
bool ParsableCheckA = float.TryParse(numberAString, out numberA);
I eventually multiply numberA by another float later. I'm handling text that won't parse with a simple error message later. Couple things that bug me:
1) Why do I need to use numberAString in the TryParse parameters instead of its value? Why can't I just drop GUI.Textfield etc. into that slot? Why do I need to break this up over two lines of code?
2) I get a warning that I never use ParsableCheckA (which is true). But without it, I can't seem to use that Tryparse helper, no? Is there a way to eliminate the need for that bool? Thanks.
TryParse() Metod and its usage is rather straighforward, as shown in the following example:
double _dblOriginal;
_dblOriginal=3.141592;
string _str;
_str = _dblOriginal.ToString();
double _dblParsed;
bool _parseOK= TryParse(_str, out dblParsed);
More details in: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.double.tryparse%28v=vs.110%29.aspx
Note: make sure that in your example the string numberAString you pass to the TryParse() method contains a valid number.
Also, FYI: TryParse() method has some performance benefits compare to just Parse() method because it does not throw an exception if parsing fail (instead you just check the bool result value).
Hope this will help. Regards,
(1) numberAString (see GUI.TextField) is a string, so you can use it directly in the TryParse() call.
(2) TryParse() is designed to return a boolean value so you can check for errors and take action. However, you aren't required to assign the return value. You can us it like this and simply accept the default value (0.0) assigned to the out parameter:
float.TryParse(numberAString, out numberA);
In this case you would not be able to distinguish between an invalid entry and a value that parsed correctly as zero.
I personally create an extension method to make my number parsing easier. If performance is critical, then this may not be a good idea (because for valid floats, you'll be essentially converting them twice). But I don't the effect on performance is much more than negligible.
public static class NumberExtensions
{
//Test if the text represents a valid float.
public static bool IsFloat(this string text)
{
float dummy = 0;
return Float.TryParse(text, out dummy);
}
//Convert the text to a float. Will throw exception if it's not a valid float.
public static float ToFloat(this string text)
{
float number = Float.Parse(text);
return number;
}
}
Usage...
string text = "123";
if(text.IsFloat())
{
//text must be a valid float
float myfloat = text.ToFloat();
}
else
{
//text isn't a valid float
}
You have to remember to test if it's a float by calling the IsFloat() extension method, but it's much easier for me to think of it conceptually like this rather than using out variables, which some think is a bad idea.
This question already has answers here:
How to convert string to integer in C#
(12 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
I need to convert a string to integer. My string can be of any type (float/int/string/special character).
For example:
If my string is "2.3", I need to convert to = 2
If my string is "anyCharacter", I need to convert to = 0
If my string is "2", I need to convert to = 2
I tried the following:
string a = "1.25";int b = Convert.ToInt32(a);
I got the error:
Input string was not in a correct format
How do I convert it?
Use Double.TryParse() and once you get the value from it, convert it to int using Convert.ToInt():
double parsedNum;
if (Double.TryParse(YourString, out parsedNum) {
newInt = Convert.ToInt32(num);
}
else {
newInt = 0;
}
Try to parse it as a floating point number, and convert to integer after that:
double num;
if (Double.TryParse(a, out num) {
b = (int)num;
} else {
b = 0;
}
This should help: treat any string as if it were a double, then Math.Floor() it to round it down to the nearest integer.
double theNum = 0;
string theString = "whatever"; // "2.3"; // "2";
if(double.TryParse(theString, out theNum) == false) theNum = 0;
//finally, cut the decimal part
int finalNum = (int)Math.Floor(theNum);
NOTE: the if might not be needed per-se, due to theNum initialization, but it's more readable this way.
I think Convert.ToInt32 is the wrong place to look for - I would use Integer.Tryparse and if TryParse evaluates to false, assign a 0 to the variable. Before the TryParse, you could simply delete any character after the dot, if you find it in the string.
Also, keep in mind that some languages use "," as a separator.
Try:
if (int.TryParse(string, out int)) {
variable = int.Parse(string);
}
As far as I know, there isn't any generic conversion, so you'd have to do a switch to find out the type of the variable and then use either of the following (for each type):
int.Parse(string)
or
int.TryParse(string, out int)
The second one will return a boolean which you can use to see if the conversion passed or failed.
Your best option would be to use double or decimal parsing as this won't remove any decimal places, unlike int.
bool Int32.TryParse(string, out int)
The boolean return value indicates if the conversion was successful or not.
Try something like this:
public int ForceToInt(string input)
{
int value; //Default is zero
int.TryParse(str, out value);
return value;
}
This will do the trick. However I don't recommend taking this approach. It is better to control your input whereever you get it.
I may have the following types:
Number with decimal : 100.90
Number (int32) : 32
String : ""
What I want is a function which tries to parse as a decimal and if it fails, then tries to parse as an int and if that fails then its a string.
Any sort of function in C# which has the following functionality is appreciated.
public static object cascadeParse(string obj)
{
decimal decRet;
if (!decimal.TryParse(obj, out decRet))
{
int intRet;
if (!int.TryParse(obj, out intRet))
{
return obj;
}
else
{
return intRet;
}
}
else
{
return decRet;
}
}
However this method will always return a decimal when passed something that can be parsed as an int as ints can always be parsed as decimal. You may want to re-order the TryParses to put the int one first.
TryParse() is your friend, however I don't understand what you want as all valid ints are also valid decimals.