Resource has the get overloaded version of getString which takes a varargs of type Object: getString(int, java.lang.Object…). If you setup correctly your string in strings.xml, with the correct place holders, you can use this version to retrieve the formatted version of your final String. E.g. <string name=”welcome_messages”>Hello, %1$s! You have %2$d new messages.</string> using getString(R.string.welcome_message, … Read more
With string type columns like character(2) (as you mentioned later), the displayed concatenation just works because, quoting the manual: […] the string concatenation operator (||) accepts non-string input, so long as at least one input is of a string type, as shown in Table 9.8. For other cases, insert an explicit coercion to text […] … Read more
Concat returns a new sequence without modifying the original list. Try myList1.AddRange(myList2).
This should do it For large files: filenames = [‘file1.txt’, ‘file2.txt’, …] with open(‘path/to/output/file’, ‘w’) as outfile: for fname in filenames: with open(fname) as infile: for line in infile: outfile.write(line) For small files: filenames = [‘file1.txt’, ‘file2.txt’, …] with open(‘path/to/output/file’, ‘w’) as outfile: for fname in filenames: with open(fname) as infile: outfile.write(infile.read()) … and another … Read more
You’re talking about template literals. They allow for both multiline strings and string interpolation. Multiline strings: console.log(`foo bar`); // foo // bar String interpolation: var foo = ‘bar’; console.log(`Let’s meet at the ${foo}`); // Let’s meet at the bar
Yes, LINQ to Objects supports this with Enumerable.Concat: var together = first.Concat(second); NB: Should first or second be null you would receive a ArgumentNullException. To avoid this & treat nulls as you would an empty set, use the null coalescing operator like so: var together = (first ?? Enumerable.Empty<string>()).Concat(second ?? Enumerable.Empty<string>()); //amending `<string>` to the … Read more
Between those two syntaxes, you should really choose the one you prefer 🙂 Personally, I would go with your second solution in such a case (Variable interpolation), which I find easier to both write and read. The result will be the same; and even if there are performance implications, those won’t matter 1. As a … Read more
The most elegant way to do this is with a ByteArrayOutputStream. byte a[]; byte b[]; ByteArrayOutputStream outputStream = new ByteArrayOutputStream( ); outputStream.write( a ); outputStream.write( b ); byte c[] = outputStream.toByteArray( );
I’d suggest that it is better practice to use String.format(). The main reason is that String.format() can be more easily localised with text loaded from resource files whereas concatenation can’t be localised without producing a new executable with different code for each language. If you plan on your app being localisable you should also get … Read more
Slowest and doesn’t work in Python3: concatenate the items and call dict on the resulting list: $ python -mtimeit -s’d1={1:2,3:4}; d2={5:6,7:9}; d3={10:8,13:22}’ \ ‘d4 = dict(d1.items() + d2.items() + d3.items())’ 100000 loops, best of 3: 4.93 usec per loop Fastest: exploit the dict constructor to the hilt, then one update: $ python -mtimeit -s’d1={1:2,3:4}; d2={5:6,7:9}; … Read more