using std::find with a predicate - c++

I want to use std::find function along with a predicate (not sure if I use the correct word). Here is the code
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
using namespace std;
class foo {
public:
typedef pair< int, vector<int> > way;
typedef pair< int, int > index;
typedef pair< index, vector<way> > entry;
vector< entry > table;
void bar()
{
vector<int> v1;
v1.push_back(1);
v1.push_back(2);
way w = make_pair( 1, v1 );
vector<way> v2;
v2.push_back(w);
index id = make_pair( 10, 20 );
entry en = make_pair( id, v2 );
table.push_back( en );
}
void insert()
{
index new_id = make_pair( 10, 20 );
if ( find(table.begin(), table.end(), new_id) != table.end() ) {
// index matched in the table
// then I will push back a new pair (way)
// to the second part of the entry
}
}
};
int main()
{
foo f;
f.bar();
f.insert();
return 0;
}
As you can see, find() should search the table based on the first element in each entry. Right now, it says that == is not overloaded to compare a pair.

You want std::find_if:
...
if(find_if(table.begin(), table.end(), [&new_id](const entry &arg) {
return arg.first == new_id; }) != ...)
EDIT: If you don't have C++11 (and therefore no lambdas), you have to create a custom functor (function or function object) to do the comparison of entry::first with the searched index:
struct index_equal : std::unary_function<entry,bool>
{
index_equal(const index &idx) : idx_(idx) {}
bool operator()(const entry &arg) const { return arg.first == idx_; }
const index &idx_;
};
...
if(find_if(table.begin(), table.end(), index_equal(new_id)) != ...)
EDIT: Since an index is just a pair of ints, you may also just capture it by value than const reference, to keep the code clearer and more concise, but it doesn't really matter either.

In C++11, you can use also std::any_of
if (std::any_of(table.cbegin(), table.cend(),
[&new_id](const entry &arg) { return arg.first == new_id; }))

Related

Transforming std::map into ordered std::vector

I have a std::map that stores a string and a class and i want to make an ordered vector based on the value of a class attribute. However, when i iterate over the vector, nothing prints. My code so far is this and the compiler sees no errors:
void Championship::orderTeams(std::vector<std::pair<std::string, class Team> > vect, std::map<std::string, class Team>& map) {
for (auto const& entry : map)
{
if (vect.empty()) { //check if vector is empty and add the first pair
vect.push_back(std::make_pair(entry.first, entry.second));
continue;
}
for (auto pos = vect.begin(); pos != vect.end(); ++pos) {
if(entry.second.points > pos->second.points){
vect.insert(pos, std::make_pair(entry.first, entry.second));
}else if (pos==vect.end()){
//vect.insert(pos, std::make_pair(entry.first, entry.second)); //wanted to check if there's a differance between insert and push_back
vect.push_back(std::make_pair(entry.first, entry.second));
}
}
}
}
Class Team only contains 3 public int values( points, goalsTaken and goalsGiven), constructor and distructor.
The vector of pairs is called teamOrdered and i printed using:
for (const auto & team : teamOrdered){
std::cout<<team.first<<" "<<team.second.points<<" "<<team.second.goalsScored<<" "<<team.second.goalsTaken<<std::endl;
}
There's a few issues in your code. Firstly, the reason why you get no output at all, is because the vector is passed in by value; therefore, any changes to vect inside the function are lost. You want to pass it in by reference instead. You can also pass the map in by const reference, since you don't need to change the map.
On top of that, your sort method doesn't actually work. Consider the inner for-loop's condition, pos != vect.end(); however, you have an else if which is pos == vect.end(), which is simply impossible. Further, even after the element is added, you keep attempting to add it to vect, with a potentially invalid iterator (inserting into a vector may cause iterator invalidity).
Here's a working example of you code:
void Championship::orderTeams(std::vector<std::pair<std::string, Team>> &vect, const std::map<std::string, Team>& map) {
for (auto const& entry : map)
{
if (vect.empty()) { //check if vector is empty and add the first pair
vect.push_back(std::make_pair(entry.first, entry.second));
continue;
}
bool added = false;
for (auto pos = vect.begin(); pos != vect.end(); ++pos) {
if(entry.second.points > pos->second.points){
vect.insert(pos, std::make_pair(entry.first, entry.second));
added = true;
break;
}
}
if (!added){
vect.push_back(std::make_pair(entry.first, entry.second));
}
}
}
This can also be simplified, using std::sort from the algorithm header, and instead of taking in a vector, you can return one instead.
std::vector<std::pair<std::string, Team>> orderTeams2( const std::map<std::string, Team>& map) {
std::vector<std::pair<std::string, Team>> vect = { map.begin(), map.end() };
std::sort( vect.begin(), vect.end(), []( auto &left, auto &right ) {
return left.second.points > right.second.points;
});
return vect;
}
As pointed by other people, nothing prints for you because you passed vector by value. Pass it by reference or return the vector.
Also, you can sort using std::sort and a predicate. Here's a working solution:
#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>
#include <map>
#include <vector>
class Team {
public:
int points;
int goalsTaken;
int goalsGiven;
};
void orderTeams(std::vector<std::pair<std::string, class Team> >& vect, std::map<std::string, class Team>& map) {
for(auto currentIterator = map.begin(); currentIterator != map.end(); ++currentIterator) {
vect.emplace_back(currentIterator->first, currentIterator->second);
}
std::sort(vect.begin(), vect.end(),
[](const std::pair<std::string, class Team>& item1, const std::pair<std::string, class Team>& item2) -> bool { return item1.second.points > item2.second.points; });
}
int main()
{
std::vector< std::pair<std::string, class Team>> teamOrdered;
std::map<std::string, class Team> map;
map.emplace(std::string("4"), Team{ 4, 4, 4 });
map.emplace(std::string("2"), Team{ 2, 2, 2});
map.emplace(std::string("1"), Team{ 1, 1, 1 });
map.emplace(std::string("3"), Team{ 3, 3, 3});
orderTeams(teamOrdered, map);
for(const auto& team : teamOrdered) {
std::cout << team.first << " " << team.second.points << " " << team.second.goalsGiven << " " << team.second.goalsTaken << std::endl;
}
}

I cannot make a copy constructor for a bidirectional map

I am in my first year of c++ at university and in some days i have exam.
I work hard for this exam not only to succeed but to succeed with the best mark.
In this code that I post I have to make a bidirectional map which i was able to do and some other functions for it.
The problem comes when i try to make a copy constructor for this bidirectional map.
I know it is a little shameful to come to you guys with this minor problem but I last give a try.
If someone of you has patience to help me i will be very happy to succeed with high mark at my c++ exam.
So here is the header where i create a bidirectional map.This contains 2 maps: one stores the key and the value and other stores the value like key and the first key like the value. The problem comes when i have to do a copy constructor and I not have the optimal knowledge to do this.
#ifndef BIMAP_H_INCLUDED
#define BIMAP_H_INCLUDED
#include<map>
#include <utility>
template <class T>
class BidirectionalMap
{
public:
BidirectionalMap(){};
BidirectionalMap(typename std::multimap<T,T>::iterator beg, typename std::multimap<T,T>::iterator end)
{
m1.insert(beg,end
}
void insert(T a, T b)
{
m1.insert(std::pair<T,T> (a,b));
m2.insert(std::pair<T,T> (b,a));
}
BidirectionalMap& operator =(const BidirectionalMap &c)
{
m1=c.m1;
m2=c.m2;
return *this;
}
const T& at(const T &a) const
{
if(m2.find(a)!=m2.end()) return m2.at(a);
else return m1.at(a);
}
int count(const T &a) const
{
if(m2.find(a)!=m2.end()) return m2.count(a);
else if(m1.find(a)!=m1.end()) return m1.count(a);
else return 0;
}
void erase(const T &a)
{
if(m1.find(a)!=m1.end())
{
T b=m1[a];
m1.erase(a);
m2.erase(b);
}
else
{
T b=m2[a];
m2.erase(a);
m1.erase(b);
}
}
int size() const
{
return m1.size();
}
typename std::map<T,T>::const_iterator begin() const
{
return m1.begin();
}
typename std::map<T,T>::const_iterator end() const
{
return m1.end();
}
private:
std::map<T,T> m1;
std::map<T,T> m2;
};
#endif // BIMAP_H_INCLUDED
And here is the main() where i use that bidirectional map.Do not focus on 2,3,4 but only on 5 because just there I have no idea.
#include <map>
#include <functional>
#include <iostream>
#include <algorithm>
#include <string>
#include "bimap.h"
struct LengthSum
{
int length;
LengthSum():length(0) {}
void operator()(const std::pair<std::string, std::string>& p)
{
length += p.first.length();
length += p.second.length();
}
};
const int max = 1000;
int main()
{
int yourMark = 1;
// 2-es
BidirectionalMap<int> fun;
for( int i = 1; i <= max; ++i )
fun.insert( i, i + max );
BidirectionalMap<std::string> tel;
tel.insert( "Aniko", "+36(70)555-8124" );
tel.insert( "Botond", "+36(30)555-4321" );
const BidirectionalMap<std::string> ctel = tel;
if ( fun.at( 1 ) == (1 + max) &&
ctel.at( "+36(30)555-4321" ) == "Botond" )
{
yourMark = ctel.count( "Aniko" ) +
fun.count( max * 2 ) +
ctel.count( "Unknown" );
}
// 3-as
tel.erase( "+36(70)555-8124" );
if ( 0 == tel.count( "Aniko" ) &&
max == fun.size() )
{
yourMark = ctel.size() + tel.size();
}
// 4-es
const int l = std::for_each( ctel.begin(), ctel.end(), LengthSum() ).length;
yourMark = l/10;
// 5-os
std::map<double, double> md;
md[1.12] = 8.8;
md[5.4] = 7.5;
std::multimap<int, int> mmi;
mmi.insert( std::make_pair( 1, 2 ) );
mmi.insert( std::make_pair( 3, 6 ) );
mmi.insert( std::make_pair( 5, 8 ) );
//Here is the problem because i don`t know to do this :
const BidirectionalMap<int> b( mmi.begin(), mmi.end() );//??
const BidirectionalMap<double> bd( md.begin(), md.end() );//??
if ( b.at(8) == 5 )
{
yourMark = b.size() +
bd.size() +
b.count( 9 );
}
std::cout << "Your mark is " << yourMark;
std::endl( std::cout );
}
For the 2,3,4 marks i succeeded but when it comes for the best mark(5 in my country) i crashed.
So if you have the time and patience PLEASE help me :(
First of all, you are trying to copy a multimap into a map. Multimaps can have multiple items with the same index stored, while a map has only one item per index.
So, you may have to iterate over the incoming range and insert the map element wise into your maps. What you do if you have multiple indices stored in the multimap you have to decide for yourself.
Edit:
To be compatible with both map and multimap you can always make the iterator a template argument:
template<typename TIter>
BidirectionalMap(TIter beg, TIter end) {
for(TIter it = beg; it != end; ++it) {
// insert elements
}
}
I solved it like this with help from #MatthiasB
BidirectionalMap(Titer beg, Titer end)
{
for(Titer it = beg; it != end; ++it)
{
m1.insert(*it);
m2.insert(std::pair<T,T> (it->second,it->first));
}

Map doesn't sort with regard to comparator c++

I'm trying to solve a issue where I'm inserting chars in to a map of type <char, int>. If the char already exists in the map I will increase the int by 1. I have created my own comparator for prioritizing the elements within the map. The priority doesn't work in the way I hope it would work since in the end the output doesn't follow the order.
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <map>
#include <iterator>
using namespace std;
struct classcomp {
bool operator()(const int& a, const int& b) const {
return a < b;
}
};
bool isPresent(map<char,int,classcomp> mymap, char c){
return (mymap.find('b') != mymap.end());
}
int main(){
string input="dadbadddddddcabca";
map<char,int,classcomp> mymap;
char temp;
for(string::iterator it = input.begin(); it!=input.end(); ++it){
temp = *it;
if(!isPresent(mymap, temp))
mymap.insert(pair<char,int>(*it,1));
else
mymap[temp]++;
}
for (auto& x: mymap) {
cout << x.first << ": " << x.second << '\n';
}
return 0;
}
Gives the following output:
a: 4
b: 2
c: 2
d: 8
std::map is designed to be sorted by key, and providing comparator for type of value does not change anything. imagine you have std::map<char,char>, how would you think you can provide comparator for value (if it would be possible)?
So solution would be to use container that allows to sort by multiple keys like boost::multi_index or just create another map - reversed:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <map>
#include <iterator>
using namespace std;
int main(){
string input="dadbadddddddcabca";
map<char,int> mymap;
for(string::iterator it = input.begin(); it!=input.end(); ++it){
mymap[*it]++;
}
map<int,char> reversemap;
for (auto& x: mymap) {
reversemap.insert( make_pair( x.second, x.first ) );
}
for (auto& x: reversemap ) {
cout << x.first << ": " << x.second << '\n';
}
return 0;
}
Notice that your pre-check for element existance is completely redundant, std::map operator[] creates new element and initializes it, if it does not exists.
You may notice that in output you are missing some values now (though they are sorted), if that is not what you need, change reversemap type from map to multimap, which allows key duplicates.
The comparator is used to sort the chars and not the ints.
It is sorting the keys and seems to work just fine - a b c d.
map sorts its entries by key, not value. The char keys get silently cast to int in your classcomp::operator()
Why
mymap.find('b') != mymap.end());
and not
mymap.find(c) != mymap.end());
Maybe this is what you wanted
int main() {
std::string input="dadbadddddddcabca";
typedef std::map< char, int > map_t;
map_t mymap;
char temp;
for ( std::string::const_iterator it = input.begin(), e = input.end(); it != e; ++it ) {
temp = *it;
mymap[ temp ] = mymap[ temp ] + 1; // Hopufuly operator[] inserts zero initialized value, if can't find a key
}
typedef std::pair< typename map_t::key_type, typename map_t::mapped_type > pair_t;
std::vector< pair_t > sortedByValue;
sortedByValue.assign( mymap.begin(), mymap.end() );
std::sort( sortedByValue.begin(), sortedByValue.end(), []( const pair_t & left, const pair_t & right ) {
return left.second < right.second;
// change to
// return left.second > right.second;
// for descend order
} );
for ( const auto & x: sortedByValue ) {
std::cout << x.first << ": " << x.second << std::endl;
}
}
LWS link

is there an iterator across unique keys in a std::multimap?

Is there a simple or standard way to have a multimap iterator which iterate across unique keys in a multimap?
i.e. for a set that looks like: {1, "a"}, {1, "lemon"}, {2, "peacock"}, {3, "angel"}
an iterator which would start at {1, "a"} then incrementing would point to {2, "peacock"} and then incrementing again would point to {3, "angel"}?
You can use upper_bound to increment the iterator position instead of ++:
#include <map>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
multimap<int,string> mm;
mm.insert(make_pair(1, "a"));
mm.insert(make_pair(1, "lemon"));
mm.insert(make_pair(2, "peacock"));
mm.insert(make_pair(3, "angel"));
for( auto it = mm.begin(), end = mm.end();
it != end;
it = mm.upper_bound(it->first)
)
cout << it->first << ' ' << it->second << endl;
return 0;
}
This results in:
1 a
2 peacock
3 angel
Using upper_bound would result in an easy-to-read loop but each call will perform a binary tree search, resulting in an O(n log n) instead of O(n) traversal. If the difference in efficiency matters, you can structure your traversal like this:
typedef std::multimap<std::string, int> MapType;
MapType container;
for (MapType::iterator it = container.begin(); it != container.end(); ) {
std::string key = it->first;
doSomething(key);
// Advance to next non-duplicate entry.
do {
++it;
} while (it != container.end() && key == it->first);
}
As noted in the selected answer, repeated use of multimap::upper_bound leads to an O(n log n) traversal of the map. Using the external upper_bound function gives you O(n). However, you need to ensure you only compare the key of the map:
std::multimap<int, std::string> myMap = ... ;
const auto compareFirst = [](const std::pair<const int, std::string>& lhs, const std::pair<const int, std::string>& rhs) {
return lhs.first < rhs.first;
};
for(auto it = myMap.begin(); it != myMap.end(); it = std::upper_bound(it, myMap.end(), *it, compareFirst)) {
// Do stuff...
}
The underlying approach is essentially the same as user3701170's solution - i.e linear search - but we put the increment step in the for statement proper, not the loop's body. Aside from putting the increment where it "usually" lives, this also means any continue statements in the loop will behave as expected.
Runnable example
This is a slight improvement over https://stackoverflow.com/a/24212648/895245 with a runnable unit test:
#include <cassert>
#include <map>
#include <vector>
int main() {
// For testing.
auto m = std::multimap<int, int>{
{1, 2},
{1, 3},
{2, 4}
};
std::vector<int> out;
// The algorithm.
auto it = m.begin();
auto end = m.end();
while (it != end) {
auto key = it->first;
// Do what you want to do with the keys.
out.push_back(key);
do {
if (++it == end)
break;
} while (it->first == key);
}
// Assert it worked.
assert(out == std::vector<int>({1, 2}));
}
if you have to pass over all unique keys quickly then you can use std::map instead;
typedef std::map< KeyType, std::list< ValueType > > MapKeyToMultiValue;
Insertion would be more difficult, However you can iterate over all keys without having to bother with duplicate entries. Insertion would look as follows:
void insert_m(MapKeyToMultiValue &map, const KeyType key, const ValueType value )
{
auto it = map.find( key );
if (it == map.end())
{
std::list<ValueType> empty;
std::pair< MapKeyToMultiValue::iterator, bool > ret =
map.insert( MapKeyToMultiValue::value_type( key, empty ) );
it = ret.first;
}
it->second.push_back( value );
}
or you can make that very templated:
template<typename KeyType, typename ValueType,
typename MapType = std::map< KeyType, std::list< ValueType > > >
void insert_multi( MapType &map, const KeyType key, const ValueType value )
{
auto it = map.find( key );
if (it == map.end())
{
std::list<ValueType> empty;
std::pair< typename MapType::iterator, bool > ret =
map.insert( typename MapType::value_type( key, empty ) );
it = ret.first;
}
it->second.push_back( value );
}
The full test program looks as follows:
#include <map>
#include <list>
#include <string>
#include <stdio.h>
typedef std::string KeyType;
typedef int ValueType;
typedef std::map< KeyType, std::list< ValueType > > MapKeyToMultiValue;
void insert_m(MapKeyToMultiValue &map, const KeyType key, const ValueType value )
{
auto it = map.find( key );
if (it == map.end())
{
std::list<ValueType> empty;
std::pair< MapKeyToMultiValue::iterator, bool > ret =
map.insert( MapKeyToMultiValue::value_type( key, empty ) );
it = ret.first;
}
it->second.push_back( value );
}
template<typename KeyType, typename ValueType,
typename MapType = std::map< KeyType, std::list< ValueType > > >
void insert_multi( MapType &map, const KeyType key, const ValueType value )
{
auto it = map.find( key );
if (it == map.end())
{
std::list<ValueType> empty;
std::pair< typename MapType::iterator, bool > ret =
map.insert( typename MapType::value_type( key, empty ) );
it = ret.first;
}
it->second.push_back( value );
}
int main()
{
MapKeyToMultiValue map;
insert_m(map, std::string("aaa"), 1 );
insert_m(map, std::string("aaa"), 2 );
insert_m(map, std::string("bb"), 3 );
insert_m(map, std::string("cc"), 4 );
insert_multi(map, std::string("ddd"), 1 );
insert_multi(map, std::string("ddd"), 2 );
insert_multi(map, std::string("ee"), 3 );
insert_multi(map, std::string("ff"), 4 );
for(auto i = map.begin(); i != map.end(); ++i)
{
printf("%s\n", i->first.c_str() );
}
return 0;
}
Try equal_range:
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/container/multimap/equal_range
That must be an exact match.

Intersection of two `std::map`s

Given that I have two std::maps, say:
map<int, double> A;
map<int, double> B;
I'd like to get the intersection of the two maps, something of the form:
map<int, pair<double,double> > C;
Where the keys are the values in both A and B and the value is a pair of the values from A and B respectively.
Is there a clean way using the standard-library?
#include <map>
#include <utility>
template <typename KeyType, typename LeftValue, typename RightValue>
std::map<KeyType, std::pair<LeftValue, RightValue>>
IntersectMaps(const std::map<KeyType, LeftValue>& left,
const std::map<KeyType, RightValue>& right) {
std::map<KeyType, std::pair<LeftValue, RightValue>> result;
typename std::map<KeyType, LeftValue>::const_iterator il = left.begin();
typename std::map<KeyType, RightValue>::const_iterator ir = right.begin();
while (il != left.end() && ir != right.end()) {
if (il->first < ir->first)
++il;
else if (ir->first < il->first)
++ir;
else {
result.insert(std::make_pair(il->first, std::make_pair(il->second, ir->second)));
++il;
++ir;
}
}
return result;
}
I haven't tested this, or even compiled it... but it should be O(n). Because it's templated it should work with any two maps that share the same key type.
I don't think there is a pure STL way of implementing what you want. Manual implementation should not be too complicated.
Note that std::set_intersection is not a solution. The main reason being that it compares the dereferenced iterators and then copies one of the elements to the output iterator.
While comparison of the full dereferenced iterator includes the associated value (which I understand you do not want to consider as part of the key), can be solved by providing a comparison functor that would only test the key (std::pair<const Key, Value>::first), the problem of the algorithm copying only one of the two values and not composing the solution cannot be tackled externally.
EDIT: A simple linear time implementation of the function:
Note, as #Mark Ransom comments, that this solution adds an extra requirement: the keys must be equality comparable. That is not an issue with his solution here, or similarly in the answer by #Matthiew M here. It would be shameful to modify this algorithm with that fix :)
Another great advantage of #Mark's implementation is that it can compose from maps that store different value types as long as the keys are the same (which seems like an obvious requirement). I wish I would upvote more than once there..
template <typename Key, typename Value>
std::map<Key,std::pair<Value,Value> >
merge_maps( std::map<Key,Value> const & lhs, std::map<Key,Value> const & rhs )
{
typedef typename std::map<Key,Value>::const_iterator input_iterator;
std::map<Key, std::pair<Value,Value> > result;
for ( input_iterator it1 = lhs.begin(), it2 = rhs.begin(),
end1 = lhs.end(), end2 = rhs.end();
it1 != end1 && it2 != end2; )
{
if ( it1->first == it2->first )
{
result[it1->first] = std::make_pair( it1->second, it2->second );
++it1; ++it2;
}
else
{
if ( it1->first < it2->first )
++it1;
else
++it2;
}
}
return result;
}
#include <map>
using namespace std;
typedef int KeyType;
typedef double ValueType;
typedef map< KeyType, ValueType > MyMap;
typedef MyMap::iterator MyMapIter;
typedef MyMap::const_iterator MyMapConstIter;
typedef pair< ValueType, ValueType > ValueTypePair;
typedef map< KeyType, ValueTypePair > MyMapIntersection;
int main() {
MyMap A;
MyMap B;
MyMapIntersection C;
// fill up A, B
for( MyMapConstIter cit = A.begin(); cit != A.end(); ++cit ) {
const KeyType x = cit->first;
MyMapConstIter found = B.find( x );
if( found != B.end() ) {
ValueTypePair valuePair =
ValueTypePair( cit->second, found->second );
C.insert( pair< KeyType, ValueTypePair>( x, valuePair ) );
}
}
}
A (better) solution based on the fact that the maps are sorted. (Shame on me that I overlooked it.) Thanks to David Rodríguez - dribeas for the suggestion.
#include <map>
using namespace std;
typedef int KeyType;
typedef double ValueType;
typedef map< KeyType, ValueType > MyMap;
typedef MyMap::iterator MyMapIter;
typedef MyMap::const_iterator MyMapConstIter;
typedef pair< ValueType, ValueType > ValueTypePair;
typedef map< KeyType, ValueTypePair > MyMapIntersection;
void constructInsert( MyMapIntersection & c, MyMapConstIter const & acit,
MyMapConstIter const & bcit ) {
ValueTypePair valuePair = ValueTypePair( acit->second, bcit->second );
c.insert( pair< KeyType, ValueTypePair>( acit->first, valuePair ) );
}
int main() {
MyMap A;
MyMap B;
MyMapIntersection C;
// fill up A, B
MyMapConstIter acit, bcit;
for( acit = A.begin(), bcit = B.begin();
(acit != A.end()) && (bcit != B.end()); /* Inside loop */ ) {
const KeyType aKey = acit->first;
const KeyType bKey = bcit->first;
if( aKey < bKey ) {
++acit;
}
else if( aKey == bKey ) {
constructInsert( C, acit, bcit );
++acit;
++bcit;
}
else {
++bcit;
}
}
}
Okay, let's get ready to get your hands dirty :)
I'll be using std::mismatch and std::transform
First of all, some types:
typedef std::map<int, double> input_map;
typedef input_map::const_reference const_reference;
typedef input_map::const_iterator const_iterator;
typedef std::pair<const_iterator,const_iterator> const_pair;
typedef std::map<int, std::pair<double,double> > result_map;
Then predicates
bool less(const_reference lhs, const_reference rhs)
{
return lhs.first < rhs.first;
}
result_map::value_type pack(const_reference lhs, const_reference rhs)
{
assert(lhs.first == rhs.first);
return std::make_pair(lhs.first, std::make_pair(lhs.second, rhs.second));
}
Now main:
result_map func(input_map const& m1, input_map const& m2)
{
if (m1.empty() || m2.empty()) { return result_map(); }
// mismatch unfortunately only checks one range
// god do I hate those algorithms sometimes...
if (*(--m1.end()) < *(--m2.end()) { return func(m2, m1); }
const_pair current = std::make_pair(m1.begin(), m2.begin()),
end = std::make_pair(m1.end(), m2.end());
result_map result;
// Infamous middle loop, the check is middle-way in the loop
while(true)
{
const_pair next = std::mismatch(p.first, end.first, p.second, less);
std::transform(current.first, next.first, current.second,
std::inserter(result, result.begin()), pack);
// If any of the iterators reached the end, then the loop will stop
if (next.first == end.first || next.second == end.second) { break; }
// Advance the lesser "next"
if (less(*next.first, *next.second)) { ++next.first; }
else { ++next.second; }
current = next;
}
return result;
}
I find this solution quite elegant... notwithstanding the awkard setup part since we need to ensure that the first range ends up quicker than the second because of mismatch...
Notice that the advance is really stupid, we could loop specifically here until we had *next.first.key == *next.second.key but it would complicate the loop.
I really don't find this better than a handcrafted loop though... consider:
result_map func2(input_map const& lhs, input_map const& rhs)
{
result_map result;
for (const_iterator lit = lhs.begin(), lend = lhs.end(),
rit = rhs.begin(), rend = rhs.end();
lit != lend && rit != rend;)
{
if (lit->first < rit->first) { ++lit; }
else if (rit->first < lit->first) { ++rit; }
else
{
result[lit->first] = std::make_pair(lit->second, rit->second);
++lit, ++rit;
}
}
return result;
}
It's much more compact, probably more efficient... sometimes the functions you're looking are not general enough to be in the STL :)
EDIT: Since I was pretty sure there was a better STL-like solution to this, I figured one out. It's different enough that I'm posting it as a separate answer.
There are a few tricks to this. Firstly, you'd like to use set_intersection, but you have two maps. The solution is a custom comparator and the std::transform algorithm. Someone more familiar with the standard library than me can probably optimize this, but it works. Note that boost::bind would allow you to cut down on the silly helper functions that make this work.
#include <algorithm>
#include <map>
#include <set>
bool myLess(const std::map<int,double>::value_type &v1,
const std::map<int,double>::value_type &v2) {
return v1.first < v2.first;
}
int getKey(const std::map<int,double>::value_type &v) {
return v.first;
}
struct functor {
std::map<int,double> &m1,&m2;
functor(std::map<int,double> &im1, std::map<int,double> &im2) : m1(im1), m2(im2) {}
std::pair<int,std::pair<double,double> > operator() (int x) {
return std::make_pair(x, std::make_pair(m1[x],m2[x]));
}
};
int main() {
std::map<int,double> m1, m2;
m1[0]=0;m1[1]=1; m1[2]=2; m1[3]=3;
m2[1]=11;m2[2]=12;m2[3]=13;m2[4]=14;
std::set<int> keys1,keys2,keys;
//Extract the keys from each map with a transform
std::transform(m1.begin(),m1.end(),std::inserter(keys1,keys1.begin()),getKey);
std::transform(m2.begin(),m2.end(),std::inserter(keys2,keys2.begin()),getKey);
//set_intersection to get the common keys
std::set_intersection(keys1.begin(),keys1.end(),keys2.begin(),keys2.end(),
std::inserter(keys,keys.begin()));
std::map<int, std::pair<double,double> > result;
functor f(m1,m2); //stash our maps into the functor for later use
//transform from the key list to the double-map
std::transform(keys.begin(),keys.end(),std::inserter(result,result.begin()),f);
return 0;
}
Like much of C++, the final use of everything is fairly slick (everything in main()), but the setup is more verbose than we would really like.
The following is a simplification of my previous answer, mostly taking advantage of the fact that set_intersection CAN be used with maps as input, but only if you make the output a set of std::pairs. The result also cuts down intermediates to a single "common keys" list.
#include <algorithm>
#include <map>
#include <set>
struct cK { //This function object does double duty, the two argument version is for
//the set_intersection, the one argument version is for the transform
std::map<int,double> &m1,&m2;
cK(std::map<int,double> &im1, std::map<int,double> &im2) : m1(im1), m2(im2)
std::pair<int,std::pair<double,double> > operator() (std::pair<int,double> v
return std::make_pair(v.first, std::make_pair(m1[v.first],m2[v.first]));
}
bool operator() (std::pair<int,double> v1, std::pair<int,double> v2) {
return v1.first < v2.first;
}
};
int main() {
std::map<int,double> m1, m2;
m1[0]=0;m1[1]=1; m1[2]=2; m1[3]=3;
m2[1]=11;m2[2]=12;m2[3]=13;m2[4]=14;
// Get the subset of map1 that has elements in map2
std::set<std::pair<int,double> > sIntersection;
cK compareKeys(m1,m2);
std::set_intersection(m1.begin(),m1.end(),m2.begin(),m2.end(),
std::inserter(sIntersection,sIntersection.begin()),compareKeys);
// Use a custom transform to produce an output set
std::map<int, std::pair<double,double> > result;
std::transform(sIntersection.begin(),sIntersection.end(),
std::inserter(result,result.begin()), compareKeys);
return 0;
}
Almost a year after... but nevertheless :)
This one is for a set container, but you can easily change it to use a map:
template <class InputIterator, class OutputIterator>
OutputIterator intersect(InputIterator lf, InputIterator ll,
InputIterator rf, InputIterator rl,
OutputIterator result)
{
while(lf != ll && rf != rl)
{
if(*lf < *rf)
++lf;
else if(*lf > *rf)
++rf;
else
{
*result = *lf;
++lf;
++rf;
}
}
return result;
}
Usage:
intersect(set1.begin(), set1.end(),
set2.begin(), set2.end(),
inserter(output_container, output_container.begin()));
set1 and set2 are both set containers whilst output_container can be set, list, array etc..
inserter generates an insert iterator
template<typename K, typename V>
std::map<K, V> UnionMaps(const std::map<K, V> & left, const std::map<K, V> & right)
{
std::map<K, V > result;
typename std::map<K, V>::const_iterator il = left.begin();
typename std::map<K, V>::const_iterator ir = right.begin();
while (il != left.end() && ir != right.end())
{
if ((il->first < ir->first)){
result.insert(make_pair(il->first, il->second));
++il;
}else if ((ir->first < il->first)){
result.insert(make_pair(ir->first, ir->second));
++ir;
}else{
result.insert(make_pair(il->first, il->second+ir->second));//add
++il;
++ir;
}
}
while (il != left.end() ){
result.insert(make_pair(il->first, il->second));
il++;
}
while (ir != right.end() ){
result.insert(make_pair(ir->first, ir->second));
ir++;
}
return result;
}