C++ Sieve of Eratosthenes finding 3 too many primes - c++

I have a programming assignment to write a program in C++ that finds all primes less than n (user input). One half of the assignment involves the Sieve of Eratosthenes. My code is working (read: assignment is complete), but before I edited the output, it was unconditionally printing out n-3, n-2, and n-1 as primes even if they were not prime. I'm not sure why this is happening. I'd appreciate a bit of feedback and ideas as to why the program is acting the way it is. Here is the unaltered code:
Please note that I am using a ListNode class and a LinkedList class, both of which are fully functional. EDIT: partial main added; notice the second item in the for loop is size-3. If it's left at size, the program outputs 3 extra non-primes.
int main()
{
for(int i = 0; i<my_list.size()-3; i++)
{
if(marked[i]==true)
cout<<my_list[i]<<"\n";
}
}
void eratosthenes(int item)
{
bool run=true;
int p=2, count=0;
for(int i=2; i<=item; i++)
{
my_list.append(i); // Entire list is filled with integers from 2 to n
marked.append(true); // Entire list is filled with true entries
}
while(run==true&&(2*p)<item)
{
count = 0;
int i = (2*p);
do {
marked[i-2]=false; // marked values are false and not prime
i+=p;
} while(i<item-2);
for(int i=0; i<item-2; i++) // i starts at 0 and increments by 1
{ // each time through the loop
if(my_list[i]>p)
{
if(marked[i]==true) // If a value stored in a node is true
{ // (prime), it becomes the new p.
p=my_list[i]; // The loop is then broken.
break;
}
}
}
for(int j=1; j<item-2; j++)
{
if(marked[j]==false)
{
count=1;
}
}
if(count==0)
run=false;
}

Complete method
void Eratosthenes(int upperBound)
{
bool Prime[upperBound];
for(int i = 0;i<upperBound;i++)
Prime[i]=true;
for (int i = 2; i <= sqrt(upperBound); i++)
{
if (Prime[i])
{
for (int j = i * 2; j < upperBound; j += i)
Prime[j] = false;
}
}
for(int i=2;i<upperBound;i++)
{
if(Prime[i]==true)
cout<<i<<" ";
}
}

From your code:
do{
marked[i-2]=false;//marked values are false and not prime
i+=p;
}while(i<item-2);
This loop is responsible for going through all numbers i that are integer multiples of the prime number p and marking them not prime, as I understand. Why are you stopping on the condition i < item - 2? This would be fine if i were your index for the my_list and marked lists, but in this case it's not; it's the actual number you're marking not prime. I suspect this is why you're getting numbers near your limit (item) that are marked as prime—your loop here exits before i ever gets to those numbers!
By the way, you could do this as a for loop instead, which would be easier to read. The for loop has the meaning "go through each element in a set" (whether that's consecutive integers, or every nth integer, or elements in an array/list/deque, etc.), so a programmer reading your code knows that immediately and doesn't have to figure it out from your while loop.
// mark every multiple of the current prime as not prime
for(int i = 2*p; i < item - 2; i += p)
{
marked[i-2] = false;
}
(This is the same as your original code, no fixes applied).
Some general comments to improve your algorithm/code:
Try using more descriptive variable names. Your use of i two times to mean different things is confusing, and in general single letters don't mean much as to what the variable represents (although sometimes they're sufficient, e.g. a for loop where i is the index of a list/array).
Also, you're looping over your list a lot more than you need to. The minimum a sieve of Eratosthenes algorithm needs is two nested for loops (not including initializing a list/array to all true).
One example of where you're doing more work than necessary is that you're looping starting from index 0 to find the next p to use—instead of just remembering where your current p is and starting from there. You wouldn't even need to check my_list[i] > p in that case, since you know you'd be beyond it to start off. Also, your last loop could break; early and avoid continuing on after it finds a non-prime (and I'm not sure what the point of it is).
Nikola Mitev's second answer is a more efficient and more readable implementation of the sieve (but replace sqrt(upperBound) with upperBound/2 for it to work correctly; the reason for upperBound/2 should be pretty clear from the way the Sieve works), although he didn't really give much comment or explanation on it. The first loop is "go through every number up to upperBound"; inside it, "if the current number is a prime, go through all the multiples of that prime and mark them non-prime". After that innerloop executes, the outer loop continues, going through the next numbers—no need to start from the beginning, or even type out another for loop, to find the next prime.
EDIT: sqrt(upperBound) is correct. I wasn't thinking about it carefully enough.

Why don't you work with array of booleans for simplicity starting from index 2, and when you will print the result, you will print indices with value of true

Related

Selective Infinite Loop in Making a Tournament Tree

I want to write a program that randomly generates a tournament tree using only the number of challengers. I read into another such problem, but the answer described how ranks would take part and seeding the players, which went a little over head.
The problem I am facing is that my algorithm produces an infinite loop for values between 1 and 4 inclusively. For all values otherwise, the program runs as desired.
My approach was to take in an array of strings for the competitors' names. Then, I would iterate over each position and randomly select a competitor's name to take that spot. Because I am swapping the names, I have to check for duplicates in the array. I believe this is where my code is experiencing issues.
Here is the snippet that actually determines the tree
for(int i = 0; i < no_players;) {
int index = rand() % ((no_players - i) + i);
// randomly choose an element from the remainder
string temp = players[index];
bool unique = true;
// check all the elements before the current position
for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) {
// if the element is already there, it is not unique
if(players[j] == temp)
unique = false;
}
// only if the element is unique, perform the swap
if(unique) {
players[index] = players[i];
players[i] = temp;
i++;
}
}
Any help is much appreciated!

ARRAYS DEBUGGING incorrect outputs, complex algorithm

I made this algorithm, i was debugging it to see why it wasnt working, but then i started getting weird stuff while printing arrays at the end of each cycle to see where the problem first occurred.
At a first glance, it seemed my while cycles didn't take into consideration the last array value, but i dunno...
all info about algorithm and everything is in the source.
What i'd like to understand is, primarily, the answer to this question:
Why does the output change sometimes?? If i run the program, 60-70% of the time i get answer 14 (which should be wrong), but some other times i get weird stuff as the result...why??
how can i debug the code if i keep getting different results....plus, if i compile for release and not debug (running codeblocks under latest gcc available in debian sid here), i get most of the times 9 as result.
CODE:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
/*void print_array
{
std::cout<<" ( ";
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) { std::cout<<array[i]<<" "; }
std::cout<<")"<<std::endl;
}*/
///this algorithm must take an array of elements and return the maximum achievable sum
///within any of the sub-arrays (or sub-segments) of the array (the sum must be composed of adjacent numbers within the array)
///it will squeeze the array ...(...positive numbers...)(...negative numbers...)(...positive numbers...)...
///into ...(positive number)(negative number)(positive number)...
///then it will 'remove' any negative numbers in case it would be convienent so that the sum between 2 positive numbers
///separated by 1 negative number would result in the highest achievable number, like this:
// -- (3,-4,4) if u do 'remove' the negative number in order to unite the positive ones, i will get 3-4+4=3. So it would
// be better not to remove the negative number, and let 4 be the highest number achievable, without any sums
// -- (3,-1,4) in this case removing -1 will result in 3-1+4=6, 6 is bigger than both 3 and 4, so it would be convienent to remove the
// negative number and sum all of the three up into one number
///so what this step does is shrink the array furthermore if it is possible to 'remove' any negatives in a smart way
///i also make it reiterate for as long as there is no more shrinking available, because if you think about it not always
///can the pc know if, after a shrinking has occured, there are more shrinkings to be done
///then, lastly, it will calculate which of the positive numbers left is highest, and it will choose that as remaining maximum sum :)
///expected result for the array of input, s[], would be (i think), 7
int main() {
const int n=4;
int s[n+1]={3,-2,4,-4,6};
int k[n+1]={0};
///PRINT ARRAY, FOR DEBUG
std::cout<<" ( ";
for (int i = 0; i <= n; i++) { std::cout<<k[i]<<" "; }
std::cout<<")"<<std::endl;
int i=0, j=0;
// step 1: compress negative and postive subsegments of array s[] into single numbers within array k[]
/*while (i<=n)
{
while (s[i]>=0)
{
k[j]+=s[i]; ++i;
}
++j;
while (s[i]<0)
{
k[j]+=s[i]; ++i;
}
++j;
}*/
while (i<=n)
{
while (s[i]>=0)
{
if (i>n) break;
k[j]+=s[i]; ++i;
}
++j;
while (s[i]<0)
{
if (i>n) break;
k[j]+=s[i]; ++i;
}
++j;
}
std::cout<<"STEP 1 : ";
///PRINT ARRAY, FOR DEBUG
std::cout<<" ( ";
for (int i = 0; i <= n; i++) { std::cout<<k[i]<<" "; }
std::cout<<")"<<std::endl;
j=0;
// step 2: remove negative numbers when handy
std::cout<<"checked WRONG! "<<unsigned(k[3])<<std::endl;
int p=1;
while (p!=0)
{
p=0;
while (j<=n)
{
std::cout<<"checked right! "<<unsigned(k[j+1])<<std::endl;
if (k[j]<=0) { ++j; continue;}
if ( k[j]>unsigned(k[j+1]) && k[j+2]>unsigned(k[j+1]) )
{
std::cout<<"checked right!"<<std::endl;
k[j+2]=k[j]+k[j+1]+k[j+2];
k[j]=0; k[j+1]=0;
++p;
}
j+=2;
}
}
std::cout<<"STEP 2 : ";
///PRINT ARRAY, FOR DEBUG
std::cout<<" ( ";
for (int i = 0; i <= n; i++) { std::cout<<k[i]<<" "; }
std::cout<<")"<<std::endl;
j=0; i=0; //i will now use "i" and "p" variables for completely different purposes, as not to waste memory
// i will be final value that algorithm needed to find
// p will be a value to put within i if it is the biggest number found yet, it will keep changing as i go through the array....
// step 3: check which positive number is bigger: IT IS THE MAX ACHIEVABLE SUM!!
while (j<=n)
{
if(k[j]<=0) { ++j; continue; }
p=k[j]; if (p>i) { std::swap(p,i); }
j+=2;
}
std::cout<<std::endl<<"MAX ACHIEVABLE SUM WITHIN SUBSEGMENTS OF ARRAY : "<<i<<std::endl;
return 0;
}
might there be problems because im not using vectors??
Thanks for your help!
EDIT: i found both my algorithm bugs!
one is the one mentioned by user m24p, found in step 1 of the algorithm, which i fixed with a kinda-ugly get-around which ill get to cleaning up later...
the other is found in step2. it seems that in the while expression check, where i check something against unsigned values of the array, what is really checked is that something agains unsigned values of some weird numbers.
i tested it, with simple cout output:
IF i do unsigned(k[anyindexofk]) and the value contained in that spot is a positive number, i get the positive number of course which is unsigned
IF that number is negative though, the value won't be simply unsigned, but look very different, like i stepped over the array or something...i get this number "4294967292" when im instead expecting -2 to return as 2 or -4 to be 4.
(that number is for -4, -2 gives 4294967294)
I edited the sources with my new stuff, thanks for the help!
EDIT 2: nvm i resolved with std::abs() using cmath libs of c++
would there have been any other ways without using abs?
In your code, you have:
while (s[i]>=0)
{
k[j]+=s[i]; ++i;
}
Where s is initialized like so
int s[n+1]={3,-2,4,-4,6};
This is one obvious bug. Your while loop will overstep the array and hit garbage data that may or may not be zeroed out. Nothing stops i from being bigger than n+1. Clean up your code so that you don't overstep arrays, and then try debugging it. Also, your question is needs to be much more specific for me to feel comfortable answering your question, but fixing bugs like the one I pointed out should make it easier to stop running into inconsistent, undefined behavior and start focusing on your algorithm. I would love to answer the question but I just can't parse what you're specifically asking or what's going wrong.

How to determine the number of array 100 are not equal to each other

I am coding a Sudoku program. I found the number in the array determine whether duplicate each other is hard.
Now I have an array: int streamNum[SIZE]
if SIZE=3,I can handle this problem like:if(streamNum[0]!=streamNum[1])...
if SIZE=100,I think that I need a better solution, is there any standard practice?
There are a couple of different ways to do this, I suppose the easiest is to write two loops
bool has_duplicate = false;
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE && !has_duplicate; ++i)
for (int j = i + 1; j < SIZE && !has_duplicate; ++j)
if (streamNum[i] == streamNum[j])
has_duplicate = true;
if (has_duplicate)
{
...
}
else
{
...
}
The first loop goes through each element in the array, the second loop checks if there is a duplicate in the remaining elements of the array (that's why it starts at i + 1). Both loops quit as soon as you find a duplicate (that's what && !has_duplicate does).
This is not the most efficient way, more efficient would be to sort the array before looking for duplicates but that would modify the contents of the array at the same time.
I hope I've understand your requirements well enough.
for(int i=0;i<size;i++){
for(int j=i+1;j<size;j++){
if(streamNUM[i]==streamNUM[j]){
...........
}
}
}
I assume that u need whether there is duplication or not this may be helpful
If not comment
It's a little unclear what exactly you're looking to do here but I'm assuming as it's sudoku you're only interested in storing numbers 1-9?
If so to test for a duplicate you could iterate through the source array and use a second array (with 9 elements - I've called it flag) to hold a flag showing whether each number has been used or not.
So.. something like:
for (loop=0;loop<size;loop++) {
if (flag[streamNum[loop]]==true) {
//duplicate - do something & break this loop
break;
}
else {
flag[streamNum[loop]=true;
}
}
Here's how I'd test against Sudoku rules - it checks horizontal, vertical and 3x3 block using the idea above but here 3 different flag arrays for the 3 rules. This assumes your standard grid is held in an 81-element array. You can easily adapt this to cater for partially-completed grids..
for (loop=0;loop<9;loop++) {
flagH=[];
flagV=[];
flagS=[];
for (loop2=0;loop2<9;loop2++) {
//horizontal
if(flagH[streamNum[(loop*9)+loop2]]==true) {
duplicate
else {
flagH[streamNum[(loop*9)+loop2]]=true);
}
//column test
if(flagV[streamNum[loop+(loop2*9)]]==true) {
..same idea as above
//3x3 sub section test
basecell = (loop%3)*3+Math.floor(loop/3)*27; //topleft corner of 3x3 square
cell = basecell+(loop2%3+(Math.floor(loop2/3)*9));
if(flagS[streamNum[cell]]==true) {
..same idea as before..
}
}

Learning C++, looking for a clarification on this project from a book

The goal here was to create a program that found and output all the prime numbers between 1 and 100. I've noticed I have a tendency to complicate things and create inefficient code, and I'm pretty sure I did that here as well. The initial code is mine, and everything that I've put between the comment tags is the code given in the book as a solution.
// Find all prime numbers between 1 and 100
#include <iostream>
#include <cmath>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int counter; // loop counter
int count_two; // counter for second loop
int val; // equals the number of count, used in division to check for primes
bool check;
check = true;
for(counter = 1; counter <= 100; counter++){
val = counter;
for(count_two = 2; count_two <= 9; count_two++){
if((val % count_two) == !(check)){
cout << val << " is a prime number.\n";
}
}
}
return 0;
}
// program didn't work properly because of needless complication; all that needs to be checked for is whether a number is divisible by two
/*
*********correct code***********
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int i, j;
bool isprime;
for(i=1; i < 100; i++) {
isprime = true;
// see if the number is evenly divisible
for(j=2; j <= i/2; j++)
// if it is, then it is not prime
if((i%j) == 0) isprime = false;
if(isprime) cout << i << " is prime.\n";
}
return 0;
}
********************************
*/
From what I can gather, I was on a reasonably correct path here. I think I complicated things with the double loop and overuse of variables, which probably led to the program working incorrectly -- I can post the output if need be, but it's certainly wrong.
My question is basically this: where exactly did I go wrong? I don't need somebody to redo this because I'd like to correct the code myself, but I've looked at this for a while and can't quite figure out why mine isn't working. Also, since I'm brand new to this, any input on syntax/readability would be helpful as well. Thanks in advance.
As it is, your code says a number is prime if it is divisible by any of the numbers from 2 to 9. You'll want a bool variable somewhere to require that it's all and not any, and you'll also need to change this line:
if((val % count_two) == !(check)){
Since check = true, this resolves as follows:
if ((val % count_two) == !true){
and
if ((val % count_two) == false){
and
if ((val % count_two) == 0){
(Notice how the value false is converted to 0. Some languages would give a compile error here. C++ converts it into an integer).
This in fact does the opposite of what you want. Instead, write this, which is correct and clearer:
if (val % count_two != 0) {
Finally, one thing you can do for readability (and convenience!) is to write i, j, and k instead of counter, count_two, and count_three. Those three letters are universally recognized by programmers as loop counters.
In addition to the points made above:
You seemed to think you didn't need to have 2 loops. You do need them both.
Currently, in your code, the upper range of the inner loop is in-dependent on the value of your outer loop. But this is not correct; you need to test divisibility up the the sqrt(outer_loop_value). You'll note in your "correct" code they use half of the outer_loop_value - this could be a performance trade off but strictly speaking you need to test up to sqrt(). But consider that your outer loop was up to 7, your inner loop is testing division all the way up to 9 and 7 is in that range. Which means 7 would be reported as not prime.
In your "correct" code the indenting makes the code harder to interpret. The inner for loop only has a single instruction. That loop loops through all possible divisors. This is unnecessary it could break out at the first point that the mod is zero. But the point is that the if(isprime) cout << i << " is prime.\n"; is happening in the outer loop, not the inner loop. In your (un-commented) code you have put that in the inner loop and this results in multiple responses per outer loop value.
Stylistically there is no need to copy the counter into a new val variable.

Vector push_back in while and for loops returns SIGABRT signal (signal 6) (C++)

I'm making a C++ game which requires me to initialize 36 numbers into a vector. You can't initialize a vector with an initializer list, so I've created a while loop to initialize it faster. I want to make it push back 4 of each number from 2 to 10, so I'm using an int named fourth to check if the number of the loop is a multiple of 4. If it is, it changes the number pushed back to the next number up. When I run it, though, I get SIGABRT. It must be a problem with fourth, though, because when I took it out, it didn't give the signal.
Here's the program:
for (int i; i < 36;) {
int fourth = 0;
fourth++;
fourth%=4;
vec.push_back(i);
if (fourth == 0) {
i++;
}
}
Please help!
You do not initialize i. Use for (int i = 0; i<36;). Also, a new variable forth is allocated on each iteration of the loop body. Thus the test fourth==0 will always yield false.
I want to make it push back 4 of each number from 2 to 10
I would use the most straight forward approach:
for (int value = 2; value <= 10; ++value)
{
for (int count = 0; count < 4; ++count)
{
vec.push_back(value);
}
}
The only optimization I would do is making sure that the capacity of the vector is sufficient before entering the loop. I would leave other optimizations to the compiler. My guess is, what you gain by omitting the inner loop, you lose by frequent modulo division.
You did not initialize i, and you are resetting fourth in every iteration. Also, with your for loop condition, I do not think it will do what you want.
I think this should work:
int fourth = 0;
for (int i = 2; i<=10;) {
fourth++;
fourth%=4;
vec.push_back(i);
if (fourth==0) {
i++;
}
}
I've been able to create a static array declaration and pass that array into the vector at initialization without issue. Pretty clean too:
const int initialValues[36] = {0,1,2...,35};
std::vector foo(initialValues);
Works with constants, but haven't tried it with non const arrays.