• Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

Sorting some numbers...kind of

This topic is 2165 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Hey

[CODE]
std::list <unsigned int> Numbers;
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
Numbers.push_back(rand() % 9500);
}
[/CODE]

Okay, so we have that piece of code. Right?

What I want to do now is to output all those numbers from lowest to highest.
Like, (31, 52, 60, 79) and not (85, 20, 852, 521)

So now you may be thinking: "Oh, that's just to swap the numbers and sort them like that."

But the thing is, I don't want to swap the numbers inside the list...
I want to simply just get the lowest number in the list like...
[CODE]OutputNumbersFromLowestToHighest(Numbers);[/CODE]

And then it'd give me the answer. And again, I don't want anything in the Numbers list to change, I just want it read.


Thanks in advance [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Pass the list to the function by value, or pass it by reference and make an internal copy of it, and then sort it. You get the values in order, and the list is unchanged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for your reply, but I think you misunderstood.
I don't want the indexes to change at all. I want to simply output the numbers directly in order.
Because, when I use the sorted list, the indexes aren't the same... Get me?
I need each index to have their specific number.
I have a feeling recursion might be useful for this, but I can't come up with anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. I love your name. YogurtEmperor.

2. If I understand correctly, you mean I should [u][b]basically[/b][/u] have a 2D list?
So I could get the index and number. I guess that makes sense.

Thanks. If anyone has anything else to add, do tell [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Segun24' timestamp='1329132415' post='4912549']
Thanks for your reply, but I think you misunderstood.
I don't want the indexes to change at all. I want to simply output the numbers directly in order.
Because, when I use the sorted list, the indexes aren't the same... Get me?
I need each index to have their specific number.
I have a feeling recursion might be useful for this, but I can't come up with anything.
[/quote]
I still don't see how sorting a copy won't work. If all you want is to output the numbers in order, how can you not sort a copy of the list and output it? The values come out in order, and the list is unchanged. Those are the only two requirements I can find in your posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Brother Bob' timestamp='1329137132' post='4912564']
[quote name='Segun24' timestamp='1329132415' post='4912549']
Thanks for your reply, but I think you misunderstood.
I don't want the indexes to change at all. I want to simply output the numbers directly in order.
Because, when I use the sorted list, the indexes aren't the same... Get me?
I need each index to have their specific number.
I have a feeling recursion might be useful for this, but I can't come up with anything.
[/quote]
I still don't see how sorting a copy won't work. If all you want is to output the numbers in order, how can you not sort a copy of the list and output it? The values come out in order, and the list is unchanged. Those are the only two requirements I can find in your posts.
[/quote]

He wants for instance:

[1, 6, 2, 4]

to be 'outputted' like:

[1 (index 0), 2 (index 2), 4 (index 3), 6 (index 1)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about something like this:

int getNext(int n)
{
int candidate = inf;
foreach(value in list)
{
if(value <= n) continue;
if(value < candidate)
candidate = value;

}

return candidate;
}

And then:

int val = inf;
for(int i = 0; i < list.length(); ++i)
{

val = gentNext(val);
if(val == inf)
break; //no more numbers in list

print val;
}

Could most probably use some more work, but should work...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Segun24' timestamp='1329133736' post='4912553']

2. If I understand correctly, you mean I should [u][b]basically[/b][/u] have a 2D list?
So I could get the index and number. I guess that makes sense.

[/quote]

No. 'copy list' != 'make 2D list'.

As two others already mentioned, the easiest way to solve this problem is to make a copy of the list, sort the copy (leaving the original unchanged), and print each item.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you want to output the original indices as well, then that is a different problem from just outputting the values you talked about from the beginning.

Different, but not much so really. Store a copy of the list which contains pairs of original values and indices. Then you can sort the list by the value field, and output both the value and the index.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]
What about something like this...
[/quote]
You could get something like that to work for distinct values, but data sets with duplicate values are a bit trickier.

Even if you got such a technique to work, it would be O(n[size=3][sup]2[/sup][/size]). Sorting the list can be done in O(n log n), output can be in O(n), which would mean that the sort then display algorithm would be O(n log n) overall. Of course, if we were talking about the performance we could also talk about the allocation overhead and cache pressure of using a linked list over a contiguous data sequence like a dynamic array.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sort an array of indices:

[code]#include <iostream>
#include <algorithm>
#include <vector>
#include <cstdlib>

class indirect_compare {
std::vector<int> const &v;

public:
indirect_compare(std::vector<int> const &v) : v(v) {
}

bool operator()(int a, int b) {
return v[a] < v[b];
}
};

int main() {
std::vector<int> values;
std::vector<int> indices;

for (int i=0; i<4; ++i) {
values.push_back(std::rand());
indices.push_back(i);
}

std::sort(indices.begin(), indices.end(), indirect_compare(values));

std::cout << "Original list:\n";
for (int i=0; i<4; ++i)
std::cout << values[i] << '\n';
std::cout << '\n';

std::cout << "After sorting:\n";
for (int i=0; i<4; ++i)
std::cout << values[indices[i]] << " (index " << indices[i] << ")\n";
std::cout << '\n';
}
[/code]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for the reply. But I've already solved it [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/happy.png[/img]

Edit: Forgot that it might be pointed towards other people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='rip-off' timestamp='1329141751' post='4912598']
[quote]
What about something like this...
[/quote]
You could get something like that to work for distinct values, but data sets with duplicate values are a bit trickier.

Even if you got such a technique to work, it would be O(n[size=3][sup]2[/sup][/size]). Sorting the list can be done in O(n log n), output can be in O(n), which would mean that the sort then display algorithm would be O(n log n) overall. Of course, if we were talking about the performance we could also talk about the allocation overhead and cache pressure of using a linked list over a contiguous data sequence like a dynamic array.
[/quote]

Yes, of course it was not a serious alternative to sorting a list, but an option as the op seemed to dislike any sorting.
Good point with the duplicates, though, I have not thought to that :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement