c++ – Disappearing Variable - c++

I am writing a function to take the intersection of two sorted vector<size_t>s named a and b. The function iterates through both vectors removing anything from a that is not also in b so that whatever remains in a is the intersection of the two. Code here:
void intersect(vector<size_t> &a, vector<size_t> &b) {
vector<size_t>::iterator aItr = a.begin();
vector<size_t>::iterator bItr = b.begin();
vector<size_t>::iterator aEnd = a.end();
vector<size_t>::iterator bEnd = b.end();
while(aItr != aEnd) {
while(*bItr < *aItr) {
bItr++;
if(bItr == bEnd) {
a.erase(aItr, aEnd);
return;
}
}
if (*aItr == *bItr) aItr++;
else aItr = a.erase(aItr, aItr+1);
}
}
I am getting a very bug. I am stepping the debugger and once it passes line 8 "while(*bItr < *aItr)" b seems to disappear. The debugger seems not to know that b even exists! When b comes back into existence after it goes back to the top of the loop it has now taken on the values of a!
This is the kind of behavior that I expect to see in dynamic memory error, but as you can see I am not managing any dynamic memory here. I am super confused and could really use some help.
Thanks in advance!

Well, perhaps you should first address a major issue with your code: iterator invalidation.
See: Iterator invalidation rules here on StackOverflow.
When you erase an element in a vector, iterators into that vector at the point of deletion and further on are not guaranteed to be valid. Your code, though, assumes such validity for aEnd (thanks #SidS).
I would guess either this is the reason for what you're seeing, or maybe it's your compiler optimization flags which can change the execution flow, the lifetimes of variables which are not necessary, etc.
Plus, as #KT. notes, your erases can be really expensive, making your algorithm potentially quadratic-time in the length of a.

You are making the assumption that b contains at least one element. To address that, you can add this prior to your first loop :
if (bItr == bEnd)
{
a.clear();
return;
}
Also, since you're erasing elements from a, aEnd will become invalid. Replace every use of aEnd with a.end().
std::set_intersection could do all of this for you :
void intersect(vector<size_t> &a, const vector<size_t> &b)
{
auto it = set_intersection(a.begin(), a.end(), b.begin(), b.end(), a.begin());
a.erase(it, a.end());
}

Related

Iterators invalidation

Hi I read in C++ primer that adding elements to a vector invalidates the iterators. I don't understand why deleting elements doesn't invalidate them as the following code works
std::vector<int> a = {1,2,3,4,5,6};
auto b = a.begin();
while (b != a.end()){
if (*b%2 != 0)
a.erase(b);
else
b++;
}
NOTE: This code if from C++ primer itself and cpp reference as well
Not actually an answer to the question, but I think it is worth mentioning that in modern C++ you should try to avoid iterators by using algorithms and range-based for loops. In this particular case use std::erase_if:
std::vector<int> a = {1,2,3,4,5,6};
std::erase_if(a, [](int x) { return x%2 != 0; });
In general this code snippet
auto b = a.begin();
while (b != a.end()){
if (*b%2 != 0)
a.erase(b);
else
b++;
}
is invalid. It works because the container std::vector satisfies the concept of contiguous ranges. If instead of the vector you will use for example std::list<int> when the iterator b will be invalid.
It would be correctly to write
auto b = a.begin();
while (b != a.end()){
if (*b%2 != 0)
b = a.erase(b);
else
b++;
}
Common idiom. From cppreference: (erase) 'Invalidates iterators and references at or after the point of the erase, including the end() iterator.
Others have pointed out it should be written like this:
#include <vector>
std::vector<int> vec = { 1, 2, 3, 4 };
for (auto it = vec.begin(); it != vec.end(); )
{
if (*it % 2 != 0)
{
it = vec.erase(it);
}
else
{
++it;
}
}
Adjust if one prefers 'while' over 'for'. If performance is paramount one can start from the end though this may be less cache friendly.
Edit: code snippet is literally the cppreference link.
Adding elements to a vector may lead to a complete reallocation of the vector.
This invalidates all iterators held previously.
If you delete an entry of the vector the erase method returns:
a) a iterator to the next valid element
b) the end iterator.
But you have to use it. In your case:
b = a.erase(b);
As many pointed out it works by chance. Do not do this in prod.
Iterators are designed to be as lightweight as possible so there won't be a flag saying it's invalid. That would be too wasteful.
std::vector iterator is probably implemented as a pointer with some helper functions. Removing one element will shift everything so that same pointer now points to the new element where the old one used to be. It only works because elements are stored in contiguous memory without gaps.

How does erase work on a vector? [duplicate]

I know that there are similar questions to this one, but I didn’t manage to find the way on my code by their aid. I want merely to delete/remove an element of a vector by checking an attribute of this element inside a loop. How can I do that? I tried the following code but I receive the vague message of error:
'operator =' function is unavailable in 'Player’.
for (vector<Player>::iterator it = allPlayers.begin(); it != allPlayers.end(); it++)
{
if(it->getpMoney()<=0)
it = allPlayers.erase(it);
else
++it;
}
What should I do?
Update: Do you think that the question vector::erase with pointer member pertains to the same problem? Do I need hence an assignment operator? Why?
You should not increment it in the for loop:
for (vector<Player>::iterator it=allPlayers.begin();
it!=allPlayers.end();
/*it++*/) <----------- I commented it.
{
if(it->getpMoney()<=0)
it = allPlayers.erase(it);
else
++it;
}
Notice the commented part;it++ is not needed there, as it is getting incremented in the for-body itself.
As for the error "'operator =' function is unavailable in 'Player’", it comes from the usage of erase() which internally uses operator= to move elements in the vector. In order to use erase(), the objects of class Player must be assignable, which means you need to implement operator= for Player class.
Anyway, you should avoid raw loop1 as much as possible and should prefer to use algorithms instead. In this case, the popular Erase-Remove Idiom can simplify what you're doing.
allPlayers.erase(
std::remove_if(
allPlayers.begin(),
allPlayers.end(),
[](Player const & p) { return p.getpMoney() <= 0; }
),
allPlayers.end()
);
1. It's one of the best talks by Sean Parent that I've ever watched.
if(allPlayers.empty() == false) {
for(int i = allPlayers.size() - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
if(allPlayers.at(i).getpMoney() <= 0) {
allPlayers.erase( allPlayers.begin() + i );
}
}
}
This is my way to remove elements in vector.
It's easy to understand and doesn't need any tricks.
Forget the loop and use the std or boost range algorthims.
Using Boost.Range en Lambda it would look like this:
boost::remove_if( allPlayers, bind(&Player::getpMoney, _1)<=0 );
Your specific problem is that your Player class does not have an assignment operator. You must make "Player" either copyable or movable in order to remove it from a vector. This is due to that vector needs to be contiguous and therefore needs to reorder elements in order to fill gaps created when you remove elements.
Also:
Use std algorithm
allPlayers.erase(std::remove_if(allPlayers.begin(), allPlayers.end(), [](const Player& player)
{
return player.getpMoney() <= 0;
}), allPlayers.end());
or even simpler if you have boost:
boost::remove_erase_if(allPlayers, [](const Player& player)
{
return player.getpMoney() <= 0;
});
See TimW's answer if you don't have support for C++11 lambdas.
Or do the loop backwards.
for (vector<Player>::iterator it = allPlayers.end() - 1; it != allPlayers.begin() - 1; it--)
if(it->getpMoney()<=0)
it = allPlayers.erase(it);
C++11 has introduced a new collection of functions that will be of use here.
allPlayers.erase(
std::remove_if(allPlayers.begin(), allPlayers.end(),
[](auto& x) {return x->getpMoney() <= 0;} ),
allPlayers.end());
And then you get the advantage of not having to do quite so much shifting of end elements.
Late answer, but as having seen inefficient variants:
std::remove or std::remove_if is the way to go.
If for any reason those are not available or cannot be used for whatever other reason, do what these hide away from you.
Code for removing elements efficiently:
auto pos = container.begin();
for(auto i = container.begin(); i != container.end(); ++i)
{
if(isKeepElement(*i)) // whatever condition...
{
if(i != pos)
{
*pos = *i; // will move, if move assignment is available...
}
++pos;
}
}
// well, std::remove(_if) stops here...
container.erase(pos, container.end());
You might need to write such a loop explicitly e. g. if you need the iterator itself to determine if the element is to be removed (the condition parameter needs to accept a reference to element, remember?), e. g. due to specific relationship to successor/predecessor (if this relationship is equality, though, there is std::unique).

C++ erase last element of a vector using erase(Iterator) [duplicate]

I know that there are similar questions to this one, but I didn’t manage to find the way on my code by their aid. I want merely to delete/remove an element of a vector by checking an attribute of this element inside a loop. How can I do that? I tried the following code but I receive the vague message of error:
'operator =' function is unavailable in 'Player’.
for (vector<Player>::iterator it = allPlayers.begin(); it != allPlayers.end(); it++)
{
if(it->getpMoney()<=0)
it = allPlayers.erase(it);
else
++it;
}
What should I do?
Update: Do you think that the question vector::erase with pointer member pertains to the same problem? Do I need hence an assignment operator? Why?
You should not increment it in the for loop:
for (vector<Player>::iterator it=allPlayers.begin();
it!=allPlayers.end();
/*it++*/) <----------- I commented it.
{
if(it->getpMoney()<=0)
it = allPlayers.erase(it);
else
++it;
}
Notice the commented part;it++ is not needed there, as it is getting incremented in the for-body itself.
As for the error "'operator =' function is unavailable in 'Player’", it comes from the usage of erase() which internally uses operator= to move elements in the vector. In order to use erase(), the objects of class Player must be assignable, which means you need to implement operator= for Player class.
Anyway, you should avoid raw loop1 as much as possible and should prefer to use algorithms instead. In this case, the popular Erase-Remove Idiom can simplify what you're doing.
allPlayers.erase(
std::remove_if(
allPlayers.begin(),
allPlayers.end(),
[](Player const & p) { return p.getpMoney() <= 0; }
),
allPlayers.end()
);
1. It's one of the best talks by Sean Parent that I've ever watched.
if(allPlayers.empty() == false) {
for(int i = allPlayers.size() - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
if(allPlayers.at(i).getpMoney() <= 0) {
allPlayers.erase( allPlayers.begin() + i );
}
}
}
This is my way to remove elements in vector.
It's easy to understand and doesn't need any tricks.
Forget the loop and use the std or boost range algorthims.
Using Boost.Range en Lambda it would look like this:
boost::remove_if( allPlayers, bind(&Player::getpMoney, _1)<=0 );
Your specific problem is that your Player class does not have an assignment operator. You must make "Player" either copyable or movable in order to remove it from a vector. This is due to that vector needs to be contiguous and therefore needs to reorder elements in order to fill gaps created when you remove elements.
Also:
Use std algorithm
allPlayers.erase(std::remove_if(allPlayers.begin(), allPlayers.end(), [](const Player& player)
{
return player.getpMoney() <= 0;
}), allPlayers.end());
or even simpler if you have boost:
boost::remove_erase_if(allPlayers, [](const Player& player)
{
return player.getpMoney() <= 0;
});
See TimW's answer if you don't have support for C++11 lambdas.
Or do the loop backwards.
for (vector<Player>::iterator it = allPlayers.end() - 1; it != allPlayers.begin() - 1; it--)
if(it->getpMoney()<=0)
it = allPlayers.erase(it);
C++11 has introduced a new collection of functions that will be of use here.
allPlayers.erase(
std::remove_if(allPlayers.begin(), allPlayers.end(),
[](auto& x) {return x->getpMoney() <= 0;} ),
allPlayers.end());
And then you get the advantage of not having to do quite so much shifting of end elements.
Late answer, but as having seen inefficient variants:
std::remove or std::remove_if is the way to go.
If for any reason those are not available or cannot be used for whatever other reason, do what these hide away from you.
Code for removing elements efficiently:
auto pos = container.begin();
for(auto i = container.begin(); i != container.end(); ++i)
{
if(isKeepElement(*i)) // whatever condition...
{
if(i != pos)
{
*pos = *i; // will move, if move assignment is available...
}
++pos;
}
}
// well, std::remove(_if) stops here...
container.erase(pos, container.end());
You might need to write such a loop explicitly e. g. if you need the iterator itself to determine if the element is to be removed (the condition parameter needs to accept a reference to element, remember?), e. g. due to specific relationship to successor/predecessor (if this relationship is equality, though, there is std::unique).

intersecting vectors in c++

I have a vector<vector<int> > A; of size 44,000. Now I need to intersect 'A' with another vector: vector<int> B of size 400,000. The size of inner vectors of A i.e. vector is variable and is of maximum size of 9,000 elements for doing the same I am using the following code:
for(int i=0;i<44000;i++)
vector<int> intersect;
set_intersection(A[i].begin(),A[i].end(),B.begin(),B.end(),
std::back_inserter(intersect));
Is there some way by which I may make the code efficient. All the elements in vector A are sorted i.e. they are of the form ((0,1,4,5),(7,94,830,1000)), etc. That is, all elements of A[i]'s vector < all elements of A[j]'s vector if i<j.
EDIT: One of the solutions which I thought about is to merge all the A[i]'s together into another vector mergedB using:
vector<int> mergedB;
for(int i=0;i<44000;i++)
mergedB.insert(mergedB.begin(),mergedB.end(),A[i])
vector<int> intersect;
set_intersection(mergedB.begin(),mergedB.end(),B.begin(),B.end(),
std::back_inserter(intersect));
However, I am not getting the reason as to why am I getting almost same performance with both the codes. Can someone please help me understand this
As it happens, set_itersection is easy to write.
A fancy way would be to create a concatenating iterator, and go over each element of the lhs vector. But it is easier to write set_intersection manually.
template<class MetaIt, class FilterIt, class Sink>
void meta_intersect(MetaIt mb, MetaIt me, FilterIt b, FilterIt e, Sink sink) {
using std::begin; using std::end;
if (b==e) return;
while (mb != me) {
auto b2 = begin(*mb);
auto e2 = end(*mb);
if (b2==e2) {
++mb;
continue;
}
do {
if (*b2 < *b) {
++b2;
continue;
}
if (*b < *b2) {
++b;
if (b==e) return;
continue;
}
*sink = *b2;
++sink; ++b; ++b2;
if (b==e) return;
} while (b2 != e2);
++mb;
}
}
this does not copy elements, other than into the output vector. It assumes MetaIt is an iterator to containers, FilterIt is an iterator to a compatible container, and Sink is an output iterator.
I attempted to remove all redundant comparisons while keeping the code somewhat readable. There is one redundant check -- we check b!=e and then b==e in the single case where we run out of rhs contents. As this should only happen once, the cost to clarity isn't worth it.
You could possibly make the above more efficient with vectorization on modern hardware. I'm not an expert at that. Mixing vectorization with the meta-iteration is tricky.
Since your vectors are sorted, the simplest and fastest algorithm will be to
Set the current element of both vectors to the first value
Compare the both current elements. If equal you have an interection, so increment both vectors'
If not equal increment the vector with the smallest current element.
Goto 2.

Remove elements of a vector inside the loop

I know that there are similar questions to this one, but I didn’t manage to find the way on my code by their aid. I want merely to delete/remove an element of a vector by checking an attribute of this element inside a loop. How can I do that? I tried the following code but I receive the vague message of error:
'operator =' function is unavailable in 'Player’.
for (vector<Player>::iterator it = allPlayers.begin(); it != allPlayers.end(); it++)
{
if(it->getpMoney()<=0)
it = allPlayers.erase(it);
else
++it;
}
What should I do?
Update: Do you think that the question vector::erase with pointer member pertains to the same problem? Do I need hence an assignment operator? Why?
You should not increment it in the for loop:
for (vector<Player>::iterator it=allPlayers.begin();
it!=allPlayers.end();
/*it++*/) <----------- I commented it.
{
if(it->getpMoney()<=0)
it = allPlayers.erase(it);
else
++it;
}
Notice the commented part;it++ is not needed there, as it is getting incremented in the for-body itself.
As for the error "'operator =' function is unavailable in 'Player’", it comes from the usage of erase() which internally uses operator= to move elements in the vector. In order to use erase(), the objects of class Player must be assignable, which means you need to implement operator= for Player class.
Anyway, you should avoid raw loop1 as much as possible and should prefer to use algorithms instead. In this case, the popular Erase-Remove Idiom can simplify what you're doing.
allPlayers.erase(
std::remove_if(
allPlayers.begin(),
allPlayers.end(),
[](Player const & p) { return p.getpMoney() <= 0; }
),
allPlayers.end()
);
1. It's one of the best talks by Sean Parent that I've ever watched.
if(allPlayers.empty() == false) {
for(int i = allPlayers.size() - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
if(allPlayers.at(i).getpMoney() <= 0) {
allPlayers.erase( allPlayers.begin() + i );
}
}
}
This is my way to remove elements in vector.
It's easy to understand and doesn't need any tricks.
Forget the loop and use the std or boost range algorthims.
Using Boost.Range en Lambda it would look like this:
boost::remove_if( allPlayers, bind(&Player::getpMoney, _1)<=0 );
Your specific problem is that your Player class does not have an assignment operator. You must make "Player" either copyable or movable in order to remove it from a vector. This is due to that vector needs to be contiguous and therefore needs to reorder elements in order to fill gaps created when you remove elements.
Also:
Use std algorithm
allPlayers.erase(std::remove_if(allPlayers.begin(), allPlayers.end(), [](const Player& player)
{
return player.getpMoney() <= 0;
}), allPlayers.end());
or even simpler if you have boost:
boost::remove_erase_if(allPlayers, [](const Player& player)
{
return player.getpMoney() <= 0;
});
See TimW's answer if you don't have support for C++11 lambdas.
Or do the loop backwards.
for (vector<Player>::iterator it = allPlayers.end() - 1; it != allPlayers.begin() - 1; it--)
if(it->getpMoney()<=0)
it = allPlayers.erase(it);
C++11 has introduced a new collection of functions that will be of use here.
allPlayers.erase(
std::remove_if(allPlayers.begin(), allPlayers.end(),
[](auto& x) {return x->getpMoney() <= 0;} ),
allPlayers.end());
And then you get the advantage of not having to do quite so much shifting of end elements.
Late answer, but as having seen inefficient variants:
std::remove or std::remove_if is the way to go.
If for any reason those are not available or cannot be used for whatever other reason, do what these hide away from you.
Code for removing elements efficiently:
auto pos = container.begin();
for(auto i = container.begin(); i != container.end(); ++i)
{
if(isKeepElement(*i)) // whatever condition...
{
if(i != pos)
{
*pos = *i; // will move, if move assignment is available...
}
++pos;
}
}
// well, std::remove(_if) stops here...
container.erase(pos, container.end());
You might need to write such a loop explicitly e. g. if you need the iterator itself to determine if the element is to be removed (the condition parameter needs to accept a reference to element, remember?), e. g. due to specific relationship to successor/predecessor (if this relationship is equality, though, there is std::unique).