Evaluation of main answers with a performance benchmark which confirms concerns that the current chosen answer makes costly regex operations under the hood
To date the provided answers come in 3 main styles (ignoring the JavaScript answer ;) ):
- Use String.replace(charsToDelete, ""); which uses regex under the hood
- Use Lambda
- Use simple Java implementation
In terms of code size clearly the String.replace is the most terse. The simple Java implementation is slightly smaller and cleaner (IMHO) than the Lambda (don't get me wrong - I use Lambdas often where they are appropriate)
Execution speed was, in order of fastest to slowest: simple Java implementation, Lambda and then String.replace() (that invokes regex).
By far the fastest implementation was the simple Java implementation tuned so that it preallocates the StringBuilder buffer to the max possible result length and then simply appends chars to the buffer that are not in the "chars to delete" string. This avoids any reallocates that would occur for Strings > 16 chars in length (the default allocation for StringBuilder) and it avoids the "slide left" performance hit of deleting characters from a copy of the string that occurs is the Lambda implementation.
The code below runs a simple benchmark test, running each implementation 1,000,000 times and logs the elapsed time.
The exact results vary with each run but the order of performance never changes:
Start simple Java implementation
Time: 157 ms
Start Lambda implementation
Time: 253 ms
Start String.replace implementation
Time: 634 ms
The Lambda implementation (as copied from Kaplan's answer) may be slower because it performs a "shift left by one" of all characters to the right of the character being deleted. This would obviously get worse for longer strings with lots of characters requiring deletion. Also there might be some overhead in the Lambda implementation itself.
The String.replace implementation, uses regex and does a regex "compile" at each call. An optimization of this would be to use regex directly and cache the compiled pattern to avoid the cost of compiling it each time.
package com.sample;
import java.util.function.BiFunction;
import java.util.stream.IntStream;
public class Main {
static public String deleteCharsSimple(String fromString, String charsToDelete)
{
StringBuilder buf = new StringBuilder(fromString.length()); // Preallocate to max possible result length
for(int i = 0; i < fromString.length(); i++)
if (charsToDelete.indexOf(fromString.charAt(i)) < 0)
buf.append(fromString.charAt(i)); // char not in chars to delete so add it
return buf.toString();
}
static public String deleteCharsLambda(String fromString1, String charsToDelete)
{
BiFunction<String, String, String> deleteChars = (fromString, chars) -> {
StringBuilder buf = new StringBuilder(fromString);
IntStream.range(0, buf.length()).forEach(i -> {
while (i < buf.length() && chars.indexOf(buf.charAt(i)) >= 0)
buf.deleteCharAt(i);
});
return (buf.toString());
};
return deleteChars.apply(fromString1, charsToDelete);
}
static public String deleteCharsReplace(String fromString, String charsToDelete)
{
return fromString.replace(charsToDelete, "");
}
public static void main(String[] args)
{
String str = "XXXTextX XXto modifyX";
String charsToDelete = "X"; // Should only be one char as per OP's requirement
long start, end;
System.out.println("Start simple");
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
deleteCharsSimple(str, charsToDelete);
end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Time: " + (end - start));
System.out.println("Start lambda");
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
deleteCharsLambda(str, charsToDelete);
end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Time: " + (end - start));
System.out.println("Start replace");
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
deleteCharsReplace(str, charsToDelete);
end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Time: " + (end - start));
}
}