C++: Convert string to int or vice-versa

strinstream is very useful for many basic jobs with strings, for example parsing numeric data from a string, converting a string to int/float, converting int/float to string, etc.

Here goes examples of how to use stringstream to convert to and from strings.

#include <iostream>
#include <sstream>

using namespace std;

int main()
{
   stringstream ss;
   string s;
   int n;

   //to convert int to string
   n = 1024;

   ss.clear();
   ss << n;        //write the int to stringstream
   ss >> s;        //read back the value as a string
   cout << "string value: " << s << endl;

   //to convert int to string
   s = "2048";

   ss.clear();
   ss << s;        //write the string to stringstream
   ss >> n;        //read back the value as an int
   cout << "int value: " << n << endl;

}

Have fun!

C++: Failed Conditions

At ReliSource, we used to have a mailing list called CPP in which we submitted C/C++ related facts/questions (and solutions). I'll share some of those facts/questions in my blog.

Here goes a quick C/C++ problem that I'm sure you will find interesting.

// x is a numeric variable (of built in/intrinsic data type).

if (x > 10)
{
cout << "x is > 10\n";
}
else if (x <= 10)
{
cout << "x is <= 10\n";
}

For some reason, the program didn't output anything, none of the if or else-if was executed. What can be the reason?

You shall find the answer in the comments after a week of this post (if someone already doesn't answer it).

An excellent article on interviewing

Following is an excellent article on interviewing:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/GuerrillaInterviewing3.html

A colleague of mine referred to this article while we were discussing how to improve our interview process. It's a long one but quite worth reading. I felt like these are the words of my mind.

Following are some excerpts for those who are feeling lazy and/or busy :).

===Excerpts start===

You’re going to see three types of people in your interviews. At one end of the scale, there are the unwashed masses, lacking even the most basic skills for this job. They are easy to ferret out and eliminate, often just by asking two or three quick questions. At the other extreme you’ve got your brilliant superstars who write lisp compilers for fun, in a weekend, in Assembler for the Nintendo DS. And in the middle, you have a large number of “maybes” who seem like they might just be able to contribute something. The trick is telling the difference between the superstars and the maybes, because the secret is that you don’t want to hire any of the maybes. Ever.

---

How do you detect smart in an interview? The first good sign is that you don’t have to explain things over and over again. The conversation just flows. Often, the candidate says something that shows real insight, or brains, or mental acuity. So an important part of the interview is creating a situation where someone can show you how smart they are.

---

The worst kind of interviewer is the blowhard. That’s the kind who blabs the whole time and barely leaves the candidate time to say, “yes, that’s so true, I couldn’t agree with you more.” Blowhards hire everyone; they think that the candidate must be smart because “he thinks so much like me!”

The second worst kind of interviewer is the Quiz Show Interviewer. This is the kind of person who thinks that smart means “knows a lot of facts.” They just ask a bunch of trivia questions about programming and give points for correct answers. Just for fun, here is the worst interview question on Earth: “What’s the difference between varchar and varchar2 in Oracle 8i?” This is a terrible question. There is no possible, imaginable correlation between people that know that particular piece of trivia and people that you want to hire. Who cares what the difference is? You can find out online in about fifteen seconds!

----

What should you look for during the open ended questions?
One: Look for passion. Smart people are passionate about the projects they work on. They get very excited talking about the subject. They talk quickly, and get animated.

---

These softball questions seem too easy, so when I first started asking them, I had to admit that I really expected everyone to sail right through them. What I discovered was that everybody solved the problem, but there was a lot of variation in how long it took them to solve.

---

Serge Lang, a math professor at Yale, used to give his Calculus students a fairly simple algebra problem on the first day of classes, one which almost everyone could solve, but some of them solved it as quickly as they could write while others took a while, and Professor Lang claimed that all of the students who solved the problem as quickly as they could write would get an A in the Calculus course, and all the others wouldn’t. The speed with which they solved a simple algebra problem was as good a predictor of the final grade in Calculus as a whole semester of homework, tests, midterms, and a final.

You see, if you can’t whiz through the easy stuff at 100 m.p.h., you’re never gonna get the advanced stuff.

---

15 years of experience interviewing programmers has convinced me that the best programmers all have an easy aptitude for dealing with multiple levels of abstraction simultaneously. In programming, that means specifically that they have no problem with recursion (which involves holding in your head multiple levels of the call stack at the same time) or complex pointer-based algorithms (where the address of an object is sort of like an abstract representation of the object itself).

I’ve come to realize that understanding pointers in C is not a skill, it’s an aptitude. In first year computer science classes, there are always about 200 kids at the beginning of the semester, all of whom wrote complex adventure games in BASIC for their PCs when they were 4 years old. They are having a good ol’ time learning C or Pascal in college, until one day they professor introduces pointers, and suddenly, they don’t get it. They just don’t understand anything any more.

For some reason most people seem to be born without the part of the brain that understands pointers. Pointers require a complex form of doubly-indirected thinking that some people just can’t do, and it’s pretty crucial to good programming.

---

A lot of the “script jocks” who started programming by copying JavaScript snippets into their web pages and went on to learn Perl never learned about pointers, and they can never quite produce code of the quality you need.

---

Sadly, despite the fact that I think that all good programmers should be able to handle recursion and pointers, and that this is an excellent way to tell if someone is a good programmer, the truth is that these days, programming languages have almost completely made that specific art unnecessary.

---

A lot of programmers that you might interview these days are apt to consider recursion, pointers, and even data structures to be a silly implementation detail which has been abstracted away by today’s many happy programming languages. “When was the last time you had to write a sorting algorithm?” they snicker.

Still, I don’t really care. I want my ER doctor to understand anatomy, even if all she has to do is put the computerized defibrillator nodes on my chest and push the big red button, and I want programmers to know programming down to the CPU level, even if Ruby on Rails does read your mind and build a complete Web 2.0 social collaborative networking site for you with three clicks of the mouse.

===end===