Displaying steps to maximum profit - c++

I am passing in a sorted vector that contains a data as such:
Job Details {Start Time, Finish Time, Profit}
Job 1: {1 , 2 , 50 }
Job 2: {3 , 5 , 20 }
Job 3: {6 , 19 , 100 }
Job 4: {2 , 100 , 200 }
The code finds which jobs are the best for profit by checking all paths that don't overlap for example job 1,2,3 or job 1,4 are possible and it determines job 1,4 is the best value. I am trying to build a function that displays the path on how the code got to the best possible solution.
Ex. Job 1 --> Job 4 --> $250.
But am lost on the implementation.
Main.cpp
// Find the latest job (in sorted array) that doesn't
// conflict with the job[i]. If there is no compatible job,
// then it returns -1.
int latestNonConflict(vector<Task>someVector, int i)
{
for (int j = i - 1; j >= 0; j--)
{
if (someVector[j].getEndTime() <= someVector[i - 1].getStartTime())
{
return j;
}
}
return -1;
}
// A recursive function that returns the maximum possible
// profit from given array of jobs. The array of jobs must
// be sorted according to finish time.
int bruteForceMethod(vector<Task>someVector, int n)
{
// Base case
if (n == 1)
{
return someVector[n - 1].getValue();
}
// Find profit when current job is inclueded
int inclProf = someVector[n - 1].getValue();
int i = latestNonConflict(someVector, n);
if (i != -1)
cout << someVector[i].getLabel() << "-->";
inclProf += bruteForceMethod(someVector, i + 1);
// Find profit when current job is excluded
int exclProf = bruteForceMethod(someVector, n - 1);
return max(inclProf, exclProf);
}
// The main function that returns the maximum possible
// profit from given array of jobs
int findMaxProfit(vector<Task>someVector, int n)
{
return bruteForceMethod(someVector, n);
}
int main()
{
cout << "The optimal profit is " << bruteForceMethod(tasksVector,
tasksVector.size()) << endl;
return 0;
}
Task.h
#include <string>
using namespace std;
#ifndef Task_h
#define Task_h
class Task
{
public:
Task();
Task(string, int, int, int);
void setLabel(string);
string getLabel();
void setStartTime(int);
int getStartTime();
void setEndTime(int);
int getEndTime();
void setValue(int);
int getValue();
private:
string label;
int startTime;
int endTime;
int value;
};
#endif
Task.cpp
#include "Task.h"
Task::Task()
{
}
Task::Task(string inLabel, int inStartTime, int inEndTime, int inValue)
{
label = inLabel;
startTime = inStartTime;
endTime = inEndTime;
value = inValue;
}
void Task::setLabel(string inLabel)
{
label = inLabel;
}
string Task::getLabel()
{
return label;
}
void Task::setStartTime(int inStartTime)
{
startTime = inStartTime;
}
int Task::getStartTime()
{
return startTime;
}
void Task::setEndTime(int inEndTime)
{
endTime = inEndTime;
}
int Task::getEndTime()
{
return endTime;
}
void Task::setValue(int inValue)
{
value = inValue;
}
int Task::getValue()
{
return value;
}

You can simply consider a weighted graph G where
a node is a job
a node A is linked to a node B if A.endTime < B.startTime
weight of edge(A,B) is B.profit (taking the path to B means doing job B)
You want to get the path of maximal weight of G.
Usually algorithm want a function to minimize so instead lets take for weight -B.profit.
We can always cite the Floyd–Warshall algorithm , there is even the path reconstruction algorithm provided in link aforementionned.
Home made
But let's do it home-made since it seems to be some homework.
You can do it the bruteforce way (which is less efficient but easier to grasp than Floyd Warshall) and check all the longest paths...
create a root node to which you add for children all the jobs with their respective weight associated then consider the recursive function:
def get_longest_path(node):
if !node.children
return 0
best_all = {
w: weight(node, node.children[0]),
path: [node, get_longest_path(node.children[0])]
}
for node.children as child //starting from 1
best_path_i = get_longest_path(child)
//if we found a path with lower total weight (that is, with maximal profit)
if best_path_i != 0 && best_path_i.weight < best_all.weight
best_all = {
w: weight(node, child),
path:[node, best_path_i]
}
return best_all
get_longest_path(root)
note that you can trivially memoize get_longest_path (to avoid reevalution for an already visited node) without much burden
cache = {}
def get_longest_path(node):
if !node.children
return 0
//node.id is jobId
if node.id in cache
return cache[node.id]
best_all = {
w: weight(node,node.children[0]),
path: [node, get_longest_path(node.children[0])]
}
for node.children as child //starting from 1
best_path_i = get_longest_path(child)
//if we found a path with lower total weight (that is, with maximal profit)
if best_path_i != 0 && best_path_i.weight < best_all.weight
best_all = {
w: weight(node, child),
path:[node, best_path_i]
}
cache[node.id] = best_all
return best_all
get_longest_path(root)
No cycles handled but you don't have a job which reverses time I guess

This algorithm can be approached very similarly to a recursive permutation implementation of say a string ABC which produces ABC, ACB, BAC, BCA, CAB, CBA.
Here is a simple demonstration
You could modify this to "prune" the tree when a condition is not met (eg. the letter after is lower in the alphabet than the previous), so you would get ABC as it is the only one where every succesive letter is lower (A<B<C).
Once you have that, you now understand how to recurse over Task's and prune when comparing the startTime and endTime of jobs...
So here is an implementation of the above in C++:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
struct Task {
// global counter tracking how many instances
static int counter;
int startTime;
int endTime;
int value;
int label;
Task(int inStartTime, int inEndTime, int inValue) {
startTime = inStartTime;
endTime = inEndTime;
value = inValue;
label = Task::counter++;
}
};
// store an index to each Task to keep track
int Task::counter = 1;
// build a search tree of all possible Task sequences
// pruning if next Task and current Task overlap
void jobSearchTree(vector<Task> jobSequence,
vector<Task> possibleJobs,
vector<vector<Task>> &possibleJobSequences) {
for (int i = 0; i < possibleJobs.size(); i++) {
vector<Task> l;
for (int j = 0; j < jobSequence.size(); j++)
{
l.push_back(jobSequence.at(j));
}
l.push_back(possibleJobs[i]);
// initial recursive call
if (!jobSequence.size()) {
vector<Task> searchJobs(possibleJobs);
searchJobs.erase(searchJobs.begin() + i);
jobSearchTree(l, searchJobs, possibleJobSequences);
}
// test if jobs occur sequentially
else if (l.at(l.size()-2).endTime <= l.at(l.size()-1).startTime) {
// add the Task sequence
possibleJobSequences.push_back(l);
vector<Task> searchJobs(possibleJobs);
// remove this Task from the search
searchJobs.erase(searchJobs.begin() + i);
// recursive call with Task sequence as the head
// and the remaining possible jobs as the tail
jobSearchTree(l, searchJobs, possibleJobSequences);
}
}
}
vector<int> getBestJobSequence(vector<vector<Task>> possibleJobSequences) {
int maxProfit = 0;
int totalProfit = 0;
vector<Task> bestJobSequence;
for (auto jobSequence : possibleJobSequences) {
totalProfit = 0;
for (auto Task : jobSequence) {
totalProfit += Task.value;
}
if (totalProfit > maxProfit) {
maxProfit = totalProfit;
bestJobSequence = jobSequence;
}
}
vector<int> jobIds;
for (auto Task : bestJobSequence) {
jobIds.push_back(Task.label);
}
return jobIds;
}
int main()
{
Task s1(1, 2, 50);
Task s2(3, 5, 20);
Task s3(6, 19, 100);
Task s4(2, 100, 200);
vector<Task> allJobs = {s1, s3, s4};
vector<vector<Task>> possibleJobSequences;
vector<Task> currentJobSequence;
jobSearchTree(currentJobSequence, allJobs, possibleJobSequences);
vector<int> bestJobSequence = getBestJobSequence(possibleJobSequences);
for (auto job : bestJobSequence) {
cout << job << endl;
}
return 0;
}

Related

C++ permutation tree

I have tasks and I want to calculate the most profitable order to arrange them.
Instead of checking every permutation and doing n*n! calculations, I want to build a tree of permutations, that is, the number of children at each level decreases by 1, and at each node the sub-permutation that has already been calculated will be saved and not recalculated.
For example, if I have 4 tasks, the tree will look like this:
My attached code is missing. I don't know how to build the tree and the give nodes the indexes as in the figure. I know how to deal with a binary tree, but not with a tree where the number of children is different at each lavel.
(The value of each task depends on its location.
I know how to do that, so I didn't include it in the question).
int n = 4;
struct node
{
int task_index = -1;
double value;
struct node **next;
};
void build_tree(node *current_node, int current_level = 0)
{
if (current_level < 1 || current_level >= n)
return;
// current_node->task_index = ? ;
current_node->next = new node *[n - current_level];
for (int i = 0; i < n - current_level; i++)
{
build_tree(current_node->next[i], current_level + 1);
}
}
void print_tree(node *current_node, int current_level = 0)
{
// print indexes
}
void delete_tree(node *current_node, int current_level = 0)
{
// delete nodes
}
int main()
{
struct node *root = new node;
build_tree(root);
print_tree(root);
delete_tree(root);
delete root;
return 0;
}
void build_tree(node *current_node, int current_level = 0)
{
if (current_level < 1 || current_level >= n)
return;
// current_node->task_index = ? ;
current_node->next = new node *[n - current_level];
for (int i = 0; i < n - current_level; i++)
{
build_tree(current_node->next[i], current_level + 1);
}
}
When called with the default parameter of current_level = 0, as you illustrate in your code below, this function exits on the first line without doing anything. You need to decide whether you are indexing starting from 0 or from 1.
Other than that, the general outline of the algorithm looks okay, although I did not explicitly check for correctness.
Now, more broadly: is this an exercise to see if you can write a tree structure, or are you trying to get the job done? In the latter case you probably want to use a prebuilt data structure like that in the boost graph library.
If it's an exercise in building a tree structure, is it specifically an exercise to see if you can write code dealing with raw pointers-to-pointers? If not, you should work with the correct C++ containers for the job. For instance you probably want to store the list of child nodes in a std::vector rather than have a pointer-to-pointer with the only way to tell how many child nodes exist being the depth of the node in the tree. (There may be some use case for such an extremely specialized structure if you are hyper-optimizing something for a very specific reason, but it doesn't look like that's what's going on here.)
From your explanation what you are trying to build is a data structure that reuses sub-trees for common permutations:
012 -> X
210 -> X
such that X is only instantiated once. This, of course, is recursive, seeing as
01 -> Y
10 -> Y
Y2 -> X
If you look at it closely, there are 2^n such subtrees, because any prefix can have any one of the n input tasks used or not. This means you can represent the subtree as an index into an array of size 2^n, with a total footprint O(n*2^n), which improves on the vastly larger >n! tree:
struct Edge {
std::size_t task;
std::size_t sub;
};
struct Node {
std::vector<Edge> successor; // size in [0,n]
};
std::vector<Node> permutations; // size exactly 2^n
This will have this structure:
permutations: 0 1 2 3 4 ...
|-^
|---^
|-------^
|---^
|-^
Where the node at, e.g., location 3 has both task 0 and 1 already used and "points" to all (n-2) subtrees.
Of course, building this is not entirely trivial, but it compressed the search space and allows you re-use results for specific sub-trees.
You can build the table like this:
permutations.resize(1<<n);
for (std::size_t i = 0; i < size(permutations); ++i) {
permutations[i].successor.reserve(n); // maybe better heuristic?
for (std::size_t j = 0; j < n; ++j) {
if (((1<<j) & i) == 0) {
permutations[i].successor.push_back({j,(1<<j)|i});
}
}
}
Here is a live demo for n=4.
The recursive way to generate permutations is if you have n items then all of the permutations of the items are each of the n items concatenated with the permutations of the n-1 remaining items. In code this is easier to do if you pass around the collection of items.
Below I do it with an std::vector<int>. Once using a vector it makes more sense to just follow the "rule of zero" pattern and let the nodes have vectors of children and then not need to dynamically allocate anything manually:
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>
struct node
{
int task_index = -1;
double value;
std::vector<node> next;
};
std::vector<int> remove_item(int item, const std::vector<int>& items) {
std::vector<int> output(items.size() - 1);
std::copy_if(items.begin(), items.end(), output.begin(),
[item](auto v) {return v != item; }
);
return output;
}
void build_tree(node& current_node, const std::vector<int>& tasks)
{
auto n = static_cast<int>(tasks.size());
for (auto curr_task : tasks) {
node child{ curr_task, 0.0, {} };
if (n > 1) {
build_tree(child, remove_item(curr_task, tasks));
}
current_node.next.emplace_back(std::move(child));
}
}
void print_tree(const node& current_node)
{
std::cout << "( " << current_node.task_index << " ";
for (const auto& child : current_node.next) {
print_tree(child);
}
std::cout << " )";
}
int main()
{
node root{ -1, 0.0, {} };
build_tree(root, { 1, 2, 3 });
print_tree(root);
return 0;
}

Seg. fault resizing array C++

I have a priority queue array that is filled with "Jobs" (name + priority). I've been able to get everything queue related working aside from re sizing if it is full. Here is the bits that I think are causing a segmentation fault that I haven't been able to figure out.
EDIT:
Here is a bit more code that will compile, I left in the rest of the functions in case those might help in any way. Right now the initial capacity is set to 5, when you try to add a job to the full list it will double the capacity of the array and allow you to add a couple more jobs before a SEG. fault.
pq.h
#ifndef PQ_H
#define PQ_H
#include "interface.h"
#include <string>
using namespace std;
class Job {
public:
int getPriority();
string getTaskName();
void setPriority(int val);
void setTaskName(string tname);
Job();
private:
int priority;
string taskName;
};
class PriorityQueue {
public:
PriorityQueue();
~PriorityQueue();
int size();
bool isEmpty();
void clear();
void enqueue(string value, int priority);
string dequeue();
string peek();
int peekPriority();
PriorityQueue(const PriorityQueue & src);
PriorityQueue & operator=(const PriorityQueue & src);
private:
static const int INITIAL_CAPACITY = 5;
Job *array;
int count;
int capacity;
void expandCapacity() {
Job *oldArray = array;
capacity *= 2;
array = new Job[capacity];
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
array[i] = oldArray[i];
}
delete[] oldArray;
}
};
#endif
pq.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include <cstring>
using namespace std;
//#include "job.h"
#include "pq.h"
Job::Job() // Constructor
{
priority= 0;
taskName = "There are no items in the list.";
}
int Job::getPriority(){ // returns the prority of the job
return priority;
}
string Job::getTaskName(){ // returns the name of the job
return taskName;
}
void Job::setPriority(int val){ // sets the priority of a newly created job
priority = val;
}
void Job::setTaskName(string tname){ // sets the name of a new job
taskName = tname;
}
PriorityQueue::PriorityQueue() // constructor
{
count = 0;
capacity = INITIAL_CAPACITY - 1;
array = new Job[INITIAL_CAPACITY];
}
PriorityQueue::~PriorityQueue() { // destructor
delete [] array;
}
int PriorityQueue::size() { // returns the number of jobs in the queue
return count;
}
bool PriorityQueue::isEmpty() { // returns true if queue is empty
if (count != 0){
return false;
}else{
return true;
}
}
void PriorityQueue::clear() { // clears queue of all jobs
count = 0;
// need to make it remove and delete the items
}
void PriorityQueue::enqueue(string value, int priority) {
// tests size to see if Queue is a max capacity
if(count == capacity){
expandCapacity();
cout << "\tList was full and has been expanded\n";
}
array[++count].setPriority(priority);
array[count].setTaskName(value);
// upheap operations
Job v = array[count];
int tempcount = count;
while (array[tempcount/2].getPriority() >= v.getPriority()){
array[tempcount] = array[tempcount/2];
tempcount = tempcount/2;
array[tempcount] = v;
}
}
string PriorityQueue::dequeue() {
// removes the job with the highest priority from the queue and returns the name
if(this->isEmpty()){ // make sure the queue isnt empty
string empty = "The queue is empty";
return empty;
}else{
Job remove = array[1];
array[1] = array[count--];
int j;
Job v;
int k = 1;
v = array[k];
while(k <= count/2){
cout << "dequeuewhile"; // test
j = k + k;
if(j < count && array[j].getPriority() > array[j+1].getPriority()){
j++;
cout << "dequeueloop if1"; // test
}
if(v.getPriority() <= array[j].getPriority()){
cout << "dequeueloop if2"; //test
break;
}
array[k] = array[j];
k = j;
}
array[k] = v;
return remove.getTaskName(); // returns the name of the removed job
}
}
string PriorityQueue::peek() { // returns the name of the highest priority job without removing it from the queue
if(count == 0){
return array[0].getTaskName();
}
return array[1].getTaskName();
}
int PriorityQueue::peekPriority() { // returns the priority from the highest priority job without removing it from the queue
if(count == 0){
cout << "\tThere are no items in the list.\n";
return array[0].getPriority();
}
return array[1].getPriority();
}
I think that when you do ++count, the next use of count will be out of bounds for the array.
array[++count].setPriority(priority);
// SEGMENTATION FAULT HERE
array[count].setTaskName(value);
If the capacity of the array is 5, and count was 4, then you just incremented count to 5, and tried to access element 5, which is out-of-bounds.
array = new Job[capacity];
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
array[i] = oldArray[i];
}
Lets assume capacity is 10, so you've got an array of 10 elements, ranging from elements 0 to 9.
counttells us how many elements are being used.
If count happens to be 9, then when you increment count by one, it is now 10. Then, when line come you marked as producing segment fault comes, you're trying to access element 10, in our example. There is no element 10in an array of length 10, so you're out of bounds.
array[++count].setPriority(priority); // array[10], but last element is 9!
// SEGMENTATION FAULT HERE
array[count].setTaskName(value); // array[10], but last element is 9!
And, of course, everything after that part causes the same issue, as you keep using array[count].
Your original code did exactly as the previous answer given by #antiHUMAN.
The problem you're having is mixing or erroneously using 0-based and 1-based concepts.
Your first mistake is to make capacity a 0-based number. The capacity should denote the maximum number of items in an array, thus you should not be subtracting 1 from it. If the array can hold 5 items, then capacity should be 5, not 4.
PriorityQueue::PriorityQueue() // constructor
{
count = 0;
capacity = INITIAL_CAPACITY; // this remains 1-based.
array = new Job[INITIAL_CAPACITY];
}
or using the initializer-list:
PriorityQueue::PriorityQueue() : count(0),
capacity(INITIAL_CAPACITY),
array(new Job[INITIAL_CAPACITY]) {}
The 0-based number in your situation should be count, not capacity. Given that, since count is 0-based, and capacity is 1-based, your test in enqueue needs to be changed:
if(count + 1 == capacity){
expandCapacity();
cout << "\tList was full and has been expanded\n";
}
Note that 1 is added to count to account for the fact that count is 0-based and capacity is 1 based.

How to limit a decrement?

There is a initial game difficulty which is
game_difficulty=5 //Initial
Every 3 times if you get it right, your difficulty goes up to infinity but every 3 times you get it wrong, your difficulty goes down but not below 5. So, in this code for ex:
if(user_words==words) win_count+=1;
else() incorrect_count+=1;
if(win_count%3==0) /*increase diff*/;
if(incorrect_count%3==0) /*decrease difficulty*/;
How should I go about doing this?
Simple answer:
if(incorrect_count%3==0) difficulty = max(difficulty-1, 5);
But personally I would wrap it up in a small class then you can contain all the logic and expand it as you go along, something such as:
class Difficulty
{
public:
Difficulty() {};
void AddWin()
{
m_IncorrectCount = 0; // reset because we got one right?
if (++m_WinCount % 3)
{
m_WinCount = 0;
++m_CurrentDifficulty;
}
}
void AddIncorrect()
{
m_WinCount = 0; // reset because we got one wrong?
if (++m_IncorrectCount >= 3 && m_CurrentDifficulty > 5)
{
m_IncorrectCount = 0;
--m_CurrentDifficulty;
}
}
int GetDifficulty()
{
return m_CurrentDifficulty;
}
private:
int m_CurrentDifficulty = 5;
int m_WinCount = 0;
int m_IncorrectCount = 0;
};
You could just add this as a condition:
if (user words==words) {
win_count += 1;
if (win_count %3 == 0) {
++diff;
}
} else {
incorrect_count += 1;
if (incorrect_count % 3 == 0 && diff > 5) {
--diff
}
}
For example:
if(win_count%3==0) difficulty++;
if(incorrect_count%3==0 && difficulty > 5) difficulty--;
This can be turned into a motivating example for custom data types.
Create a class which wraps the difficulty int as a private member variable, and in the public member functions make sure that the so-called contract is met. You will end up with a value which is always guaranteed to meet your specifications. Here is an example:
class Difficulty
{
public:
// initial values for a new Difficulty object:
Difficulty() :
right_answer_count(0),
wrong_answer_count(0),
value(5)
{}
// called when a right answer should be taken into account:
void GotItRight()
{
++right_answer_count;
if (right_answer_count == 3)
{
right_answer_count = 0;
++value;
}
}
// called when a wrong answer should be taken into account:
void GotItWrong()
{
++wrong_answer_count;
if (wrong_answer_count == 3)
{
wrong_answer_count = 0;
--value;
if (value < 5)
{
value = 5;
}
}
}
// returns the value itself
int Value() const
{
return value;
}
private:
int right_answer_count;
int wrong_answer_count;
int value;
};
And here is how you would use the class:
Difficulty game_difficulty;
// six right answers:
for (int count = 0; count < 6; ++count)
{
game_difficulty.GotItRight();
}
// check wrapped value:
std::cout << game_difficulty.Value() << "\n";
// three wrong answers:
for (int count = 0; count < 3; ++count)
{
game_difficulty.GotItWrong();
}
// check wrapped value:
std::cout << game_difficulty.Value() << "\n";
// one hundred wrong answers:
for (int count = 0; count < 100; ++count)
{
game_difficulty.GotItWrong();
}
// check wrapped value:
std::cout << game_difficulty.Value() << "\n";
Output:
7
6
5
Once you have a firm grasp on how such types are created and used, you can start to look into operator overloading so that the type can be used more like a real int, i.e. with +, - and so on.
How should I go about doing this?
You have marked this question as C++. IMHO the c++ way is to create a class encapsulating all your issues.
Perhaps something like:
class GameDifficulty
{
public:
GameDifficulty () :
game_difficulty (5), win_count(0), incorrect_count(0)
{}
~GameDifficulty () {}
void update(const T& words)
{
if(user words==words) win_count+=1;
else incorrect_count+=1;
// modify game_difficulty as you desire
if(win_count%3 == 0)
game_difficulty += 1 ; // increase diff no upper limit
if((incorrect_count%3 == 0) && (game_difficulty > 5))
game_difficulty -= 1; //decrease diff;
}
inline int gameDifficulty() { return (game_difficulty); }
// and any other access per needs of your game
private:
int game_difficulty;
int win_count;
int incorrect_count;
}
// note - not compiled or tested
usage would be:
// instantiate
GameDiffculty gameDifficulty;
// ...
// use update()
gameDifficulty.update(word);
// ...
// use access
gameDifficulty.gameDifficulty();
Advantage: encapsulation
This code is in one place, not polluting elsewhere in your code.
You can change these policies in this one place, with no impact to the rest of your code.

All possible combinations(with repetition) as values in array using recursion

I'm trying to solve a problem in which I need to insert math operations(+/- in this case) between digits or merge them to get a requested number.
For ex.: 123456789 => 123+4-5+6-7+8-9 = 120
My concept is basically generating different combinations of operation codes in array and calculating the expression until it equals some number.
The problem is I can't think of a way to generate every possible combination of math operations using recursion.
Here's the code:
#include <iostream>
#include <algorithm>
using namespace std;
enum {noop,opplus,opminus};//opcodes: 0,1,2
int applyOp(int opcode,int x, int y);
int calculate(int *digits,int *opcodes, int length);
void nextCombination();
int main()
{
int digits[9] = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9};
int wantedNumber = 100;
int length = sizeof(digits)/sizeof(digits[0]);
int opcodes[length-1];//math symbols
fill_n(opcodes,length-1,0);//init
while(calculate(digits,opcodes,length) != wantedNumber)
{
//recursive combination function here
}
return 0;
}
int applyOp(int opcode,int x, int y)
{
int result = x;
switch(opcode)
{
case noop://merge 2 digits together
result = x*10 + y;
break;
case opminus:
result -= y;
break;
case opplus:
default:
result += y;
break;
}
return result;
}
int calculate(int *digits,int *opcodes, int length)
{
int result = digits[0];
for(int i = 0;i < length-1; ++i)//elem count
{
result = applyOp(opcodes[i],result,digits[i+1]);//left to right, no priority
}
return result;
}
The key is backtracking. Each level of recursion handles
a single digit; in addition, you'll want to stop the recursion
one you've finished.
The simplest way to do this is to define a Solver class, which
keeps track of the global information, like the generated string
so far and the running total, and make the recursive function
a member. Basically something like:
class Solver
{
std::string const input;
int const target;
std::string solution;
int total;
bool isSolved;
void doSolve( std::string::const_iterator pos );
public:
Solver( std::string const& input, int target )
: input( input )
, target( target )
{
}
std::string solve()
{
total = 0;
isSolved = false;
doSolve( input.begin() );
return isSolved
? solution
: "no solution found";
}
};
In doSolve, you'll have to first check whether you've finished
(pos == input.end()): if so, set isSolved = total == target
and return immediately; otherwise, try the three possibilities,
(total = 10 * total + toDigit(*pos), total += toDigit(*pos),
and total -= toDigit(*pos)), each time saving the original
total and solution, adding the necessary text to
solution, and calling doSolve with the incremented pos.
On returning from the recursive call, if ! isSolved, restore
the previous values of total and solution, and try the next
possibility. Return as soon as you see isSolved, or when all
three possibilities have been solved.

A Problem with Vectors (std::out_of_range)

Here is the description of my problem:
The Program's Description:
I am implementing a program in C++ that tests Prim's algorithm for finding minimum spanning trees. The objective of the program is calculating the number of seconds it takes to find the minimum spanning tree for a selected number of random graphs.
What i have done up to now?
I finished the implementation of the functions and the header files for the whole program. Since the source code is small, i decided for clarity reasons to paste it with this mail in order to provide a better visualization of the problem.
The Problem:
For some reason, i am facing some sort of "out of range" vector problem during the run time of the application.
The problem is marked in the ("Prim_and_Kruskal_Algorithms.cpp") file.
Requesting help:
I would be really grateful if anyone can help me spotting the problem. I have inlined the source code with this question.
The Source Code:
The (Undirected_Graph.h) file:
#ifndef UNDIRECTED_GRAPH_H
#define UNDIRECTED_GRAPH_H
#include <vector>
using std::vector;
#include <climits>
class Edge;
class Node
{
public:
Node(int); //The constructor.
int id; //For the id of the node.
bool visited; //For checking visited nodes.
int distance;
vector <Edge*> adj; //The adjacent nodes.
};
class Edge
{
public:
Edge(Node*, Node*, int); //The constructor.
Node* start_Node; //The start_Node start of the edge.
Node* end_Node; //The end of the edge.
int w; //The weight of the edge.
bool isConnected(Node* node1, Node* node2) //Checks if the nodes are connected.
{
return((node1 == this->start_Node && node2 == this->end_Node) ||
(node1 == this->end_Node && node2 == this->start_Node));
}
};
class Graph
{
public:
Graph(int); //The Constructor.
int max_Nodes; //Maximum Number of allowed Nodes.
vector <Edge*> edges_List; //For storing the edges of the graph.
vector <Node*> nodes_List; //For storing the nodes of the graph.
void insertEdge(int, int, int);
int getNumNodes();
int getNumEdges();
};
#endif
The (Undirected_Graph.cpp) file:
#include "Undirected_Graph.h"
Node::Node(int id_Num)
{
id = id_Num;
visited = 0;
distance = INT_MAX;
}
Edge::Edge(Node* a, Node* b, int weight)
{
start_Node = a;
end_Node = b;
w = weight;
}
Graph::Graph(int size)
{
max_Nodes = size;
for (int i = 1; i <= max_Nodes; ++i)
{
Node* temp = new Node(i);
nodes_List.push_back(temp);
}
}
void Graph::insertEdge(int x, int y, int w)
{
Node* a = nodes_List[x-1];
Node* b = nodes_List[y-1];
Edge* edge1 = new Edge(a, b, w);
Edge* edge2 = new Edge(b, a, w);
edges_List.push_back(edge1);
a->adj.push_back(edge1);
b->adj.push_back(edge2);
}
int Graph::getNumNodes()
{
return max_Nodes;
}
int Graph::getNumEdges()
{
return edges_List.size();
}
The (Prim_and_Kruskal_Algorithms.h) File:
#ifndef PRIM_AND_KRUSKAL_ALGORITHMS_H
#define PRIM_AND_KRUSKAL_ALGORITHMS_H
class PKA
{
private:
//inline void generateRandomGraph();
protected:
//-No Protected Data Members in this Class.
public:
void runAlgorithms();
void prim();
};
#endif
The (Prim_and_Kruskal_Algorithms.cpp) file
*(The problem is in this file and is marked below):*
#include "Prim_and_Kruskal_Algorithms.h"
#include "Undirected_Graph.h"
#include <iostream>
using std::cout;
using std::cin;
using std::endl;
#include <cstdlib>
using std::rand;
using std::srand;
#include <ctime>
using std::time;
//=============================================================================
//============Global Variables and Settings for the program====================
//=============================================================================
const int numIterations = 1; //How many times the Prim function will run.
const int numNodes = 10; //The number of nodes in each graph.
const int numEdges = 9; //The number of edges for each graph.
const int sRandWeight = 1; //The "start" range of the weight of each edge in the graph.
const int eRandWeight = 100; //The "end" range of the weight of each edge in the graph.
//=============================================================================
//=============================================================================
//=============================================================================
void PKA::runAlgorithms() //Runs the Algorithms
{
srand( time(0) );
cout << "------------------------------" << endl;
//Calling the Functions:
cout << "\nRunning the Prim's Algorithms:\nPlease wait till the completion of the execution time" << endl;
//===============================================
//Start the clock for Prim's Algorithm:
clock_t start, finish;
start = clock();
for(int iter1 = 1; iter1 <= numIterations; ++iter1)
{
prim();
}
//Stop the clock for Prim and print the results:
finish = clock();
cout << "\n\tThe execution time of Prim's Algorithm:\t" << ((double)(finish - start) / CLOCKS_PER_SEC) << " s";
return;
}
void PKA::prim()
{
//=============================================================================
//=============================Generating A Random Graph=======================
//=============================================================================
//Randomizing Values:
//===============================================
int randStartNode = rand() % numNodes; //Generation a random start node.
int randEndNode = rand() % numNodes; //Generating a random end node.
int randWeight; //Random weight for the edge.
while(randEndNode == randStartNode) //Checking if both randomized nodes are equal.
{
randEndNode = (rand() % numNodes);
}
//===============================================
Graph myGraph(numNodes);
for(int i = 0; i < numEdges; ++i)
{
//Generating a random weight:
randWeight = sRandWeight + rand() % eRandWeight;
//Inserting a new Edge:
myGraph.insertEdge(randStartNode, randEndNode, randWeight);
}
//=============================================================================
//=============================================================================
//=============================================================================
int currentNode = 0; //The current Node being under investigation.
int adjCounter = NULL; //How many adjacent nodes do we have for the current node.
int minDistance = NULL;
int minIndex = 0;
myGraph.nodes_List[0]->distance = 0; //Indicate the start node.
myGraph.nodes_List[0]->visited = 1; //The starting node is already considered as a visited node.
for(int i = 0; i < numNodes - 1; i++)
{
//Determine how many adjacent nodes there are for the current node:
adjCounter = myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj.size();
if(adjCounter == 0) //If there are no adjacent nodes to the current node:
{
myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj.at(minIndex)->end_Node->visited = 1;
cout << "\n*******Not all nodes are connected!*******" << endl;
continue;
}
minDistance = myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj.at(0)->w;
minIndex = 0;
for(int counter = 0; adjCounter > 0; adjCounter--, counter++)
{
if(myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj[counter]->end_Node->visited == false)
{
if(myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->distance > myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj[counter]->w)
{
myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->distance = myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj[counter]->w;
}
if(minDistance > myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj[counter]->w)
{
minDistance = myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj[counter]->w;
minIndex = counter;
}
}
}
//======================================================================================
//=========================The Problem is in the following two lines====================
//======================================================================================
//Mark the current node as visited:
myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj.at(minIndex)->end_Node->visited = 1;
//Switching to the next node that we have just visited:
currentNode = myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj.at(minIndex)->start_Node->id;
//======================================================================================
//======================================================================================
//======================================================================================
}
}
The (Client_Code.cpp) file: For testing the program.
#include "Prim_and_Kruskal_Algorithms.h"
#include <iostream>
using std::cout;
using std::endl;
int main()
{
cout << "\nWelcome to the Prim and Kruskal Algorithms Comparison!" << endl;
cout << "\nPlease wait until the completion of the algorithms." << endl;
PKA myPKA; //Creating an object of the class.
myPKA.runAlgorithms(); //Running the Algorithm.
cout << "\n\nThe program terminated successfully!" << endl;
return 0;
}
Look at this line:
myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode]->adj.at(minIndex)->end_Node->visited = 1;
As an experienced C++ programmer, I find that line terrifying.
The immediate cause of trouble is that adj doesn't have as many members as you think it does; you're asking for (in my test run) the 5th element of a list of size zero. That sends you off the map, where you then start manipulating memory.
More generally, you are not checking bounds.
More generally still, you should allow these classes to manage their own members. Use accessors and mutators (getX() and setX(...)) so that member access happens all in one place and you can put the bounds checking there. Reaching down myGraph's throat like that is very unsafe.
You'll notice that I haven't said where/when/how the program diverges from intention so that the list doesn't have as many elements as it should. That's because it's too much trouble for me to track it down. If you organize the classes as I suggest, the code will be a lot cleaner, you can check your assumptions in various places, and the bug should become obvious.
EDIT:
To create a random connected graph, try this:
Graph myGraph(numNodes); //Create a new Graph.
// This ensures that the kth node is connected to the [1...(k-1)] subgraph.
for(int k=2 ; k<=numNodes ; ++k)
{
randWeight = rand() % eRandWeight;
myGraph.insertEdge(k, rand()%(k-1)+1, randWeight);
}
// This adds as many extra links as you want.
for(int i = 0; i < numExtraEdges; ++i)
{
randWeight = rand() % eRandWeight;
randStartNode = rand()%(numNodes-1)+1;
randEndNode = rand()%(numNodes-1)+1;
myGraph.insertEdge(randStartNode, randEndNode, randWeight);
}
You have too much code for a casual examination to be sure of anything. But the .at() method will throw the out-of-range exception that you mentioned and that crashing line occurs right after you've updated minIndex so I would suggest reviewing the code that determines that value. Are you using a debugger? What is the value of minIndex at the point of the exception and what is the allowable range?
Also, when you have a monster line of compounded statements like that, it can help in debugging problems like this and give you clearer, simpler looking code if you break it up. Rather than repeating big chunks of code over and over, you can have something like this:
Node * node = myGraph.nodes_List[currentNode];
assert(node);
Edge * minAdjEdge = node->adj.at(minIndex);
assert(minAdjEdge);
Then use minAdjEdge to refer to that edge instead of that repeated compound statement.
It also seems odd to me that your first use of minIndex in the big loop is still using the value determined from the node in the previous iteration, but it's applying it to the new current node. Then you reset it to zero after possibly using the stale value. But that isn't near the line that you say is causing the crash, so that may not be your problem. Like I said, you have a lot of code pasted here so it's hard to follow the entire thing.
It is too much code, but what I can observe at the first glance is that for some reason you are mixing 0-based and 1-based iteration.
Is this intentional? Couldn't that be the cause of your problem?