# Function to check whether two strings are similar at given %

Since the previous question I posted here was not found as interesting as I expected, I decided to post a new one. I made a function solely for the purpose of having fun. That is, a function that checks if two strings are similar with a given %.

int case_insensitive_chrcmp (int ch1, int ch2)
{
return ch1 == ch2 || ch1 + ' ' == ch2 || ch1 - ' ' == ch2;
}

int strpcmp (char* str1, char* str2, unsigned setting)
{
int szStr1 = strlen(str1);
int szStr2 = strlen(str2);
int szMax  = max(szStr1, szStr2);
int szMin  = 0;
int chars  = 0;

if(setting > 100)
setting = 100;

if(szStr1 == szMax)
szMin = szStr2;
else szMin = szStr1;

chars = szMax * setting / 100;

int cur = 0;
for(int i = 0; i < szMin; i++)
{
if(case_insensitive_chrcmp(str1[i], str2[i]))
cur++;
else cur = 0;

if(cur >= chars)
return 1;
}

return 0;
}


(you may need to provide your own definition for min and max since I think they are not supported by all compilers)

Example usage:

char* str1 = "Hello";
char* str2 = "Hey";
int percentage = 50%101; // or just 50 or w/e
printf("%s %i%% %s - %s\n", str1, percentage, str2, strpcmp(str1, str2, percentage) ? "true" : "false");


Output:

Hello 50% Hey - true

It calculates how many characters must match consecutively based on percentage in order to return true. The comparison between characters is also done in case insensitive manner.

Regarding safety, this function can do much more, check against null pointers, re-entrancy guarding, MT-safety and that shouldn't really damage the performance level. Speaking of performance, I am a performancecholic and the first thing I can see that is bothering me here is the two strlens - the size of the two strings can be obtained within a single loop. Otherwise there are redundant iterations.

• You probably want to use edit distance instead. Jun 30, 2018 at 12:53

Alright I have a hole in my schedule, so I will give it a review myself.

## Let's start with the function case_insensitive_chrcmp

1. The name mixes two standards for function name, the well-descriptive, but long snake_case and the less descriptive but shorter standard abbreviation naming. So it would be better if it is either:

• case_insensitive_char_compare
• chrcasecmp

Since the second function uses the second standard, I would choose chrcasecmp.

1. Many people do not like one-liners as they actually require more space (or even ironically more lines) than if they were not a function at all. Also it is a little bit slower (needs to access the routine, push the arguments onto the stack, etc). A good C function should be at least two lines and not more than a person with the old 640x480 monitor can see.

2. It can be optimized and shortened further using the bitwise XOR operator:

return ch1 == ch2 || (ch1 ^ ' ') == ch2;

Since ' ' translates to 32, which is the sixth bit set and others unset.

## And the strpcmp function

1. I already said that two strlens to find the length of two presumably identical strings is not very efficient as it needs to iterate over both the strings, increment and check against '\0 at every iteration while this could be done in a single loop. This is an optimized function to find lengths of two strings:

int str2len (char* str1, char* str2, size_t * szStr1, size_t * szStr2)
{
/* Variables */
char*   p1      = str1;
char*   p2      = str2;
size_t  len1    = 0;
size_t  len2    = 0;

/* Pre-checking */
if(str1 == NULL || str2 == NULL || szStr1 == NULL || szStr2 == NULL)
return(-1);

/* Processing */
while(str1[len1] || p2[len2])
{
if(str1[len1] != '\0')
len1++;
if(str2[len2] != '\0')
len2++;
}

/* Assignment */
*szStr1 = len1;
*szStr2 = len2;

return 0;
}

1. int cur = 0; is declaration after expression, which turns the code into C89-incompatible. Also the name cur is not very descriptive. While it may mean "current" it is not clear current of what it is. Better name nMatch.

2. chars = szMax * setting / 100; Does not define what happens if the result from the division is not a whole number. In most cases the floating point number will be omitted which may or may not be the desired behavior. I should consider using round(), floor() or ceil() on a double

3. The function checks if a char from str1 with index x matches a char with index x in str2 which makes the code susceptible to this scenario: "Hello World" and "World" will always return false. The function should rather search whether a characters are CONTAINED consecutively into the second string instead.

• It is well unlikely str2len is faster then strlen(str1), strlen(str2). Quality strlen() will operate on 4 or 8 bytes at a time vs. this test against each null character twice each loop. Jul 3, 2018 at 3:37
• "In most cases the floating point number will be omitted " is unclear. It is integer math with szMax * setting / 100. In all cases, floating point number will be omitted as there is none in that code. Jul 3, 2018 at 3:40

Unless case_insensitive_chrcmp() is supposed to be part of the public interface, declare it with static linkage.

strpcmp is a name reserved for future Standard Library expansion. User programs should not declare identifiers beginning with str.

This code makes assumptions about the language and the character coding:

    return ch1 == ch2 || ch1 + ' ' == ch2 || ch1 - ' ' == ch2;


While in ASCII, the space character happens to equal 32, and 32 is the difference between its lowercase and uppercase letters, those two facts are not true in other character codings, and there isn't necessarily a constant separation between equivalent letters of different case. For example in ISO 8859.9, İ and ı differ by 32.

Even in ASCII, this test is valid only if ch1 and ch2 are both letters - this code makes 6 and V equivalent, which better testing would uncover.

Here, we implicitly convert from size_t to int for no good reason:

int szStr1 = strlen(str1);
int szStr2 = strlen(str2);


It's slightly inefficient to be measuring the string lengths before we start, as we could produce that information as a by-product of the traversal we're about to undertake.

We call a max() function that's not declared. It's not a standard function, so we should provide it.

The return value is surprising to programmers familiar with strcmp and memcmp, who would expect 0 to indicate no difference.