I'm trying to figure out how to create a sorted dictionary where the key is sorted in a non-alphabetical manner. Is there a way I can define the way I want it to sort?
For example, the keys might be in order like the following:
AAA1X
AAB1Y
AAC1Y
AAA2X
AAB2Y
AAC2X
Although the first three letters are alphabetical, if I sort as is it will lump them in the wrong order (due to the number). Also note, that there is either a X or Y at the end. In the code, there will only ever be an X or a Y.
Even if I can write an enumeration for the ordering of all possible combinations I'd be willing to do that as well, but I'm not sure how I can use the sorted dictionary and an enumeration...
I know this is a bit vague, but any help would be much appreciated!
Cheers!
One of the constructors for SortedDictionary<TKey, TValue> takes an IComparer<TKey>, where you can specify a custom comparer class that the dictionary will use for sorting.
public class CustomComparer : IComparer<string>
{
public int Compare(string x, string y)
{
// do your own comparison however you like; return a negative value
// to indicate that x < y, a positive value to indicate that x > y,
// or 0 to indicate that they are equal.
}
}
...
SortedDictionary<string, object> dict =
new SortedDictionary<string, object>(new CustomComparer());
You can :
Create a class that encapsulates those keys and override the == operator, Object.Equals method and the Object.GetHashCode method. Also have the class implement the IComparable interface such that the rules for equality will automatically sort your keys the right way. Now you can simply place those keys in a SortedDictionary or SortedList and it will automatically sort the way you want.
OR
Implement an IComparer object that compares those strings the way you want, and specify the IComparer when constructing a SortedDictionaryor SortedList.
Related
I'm writing a small class which I'm gonna move around when needed like a dll, and it's gonna have different sorting algorithms in it. I want the functions to work with any lists, of any types, including objects. So it's basically like this:
class TemplateSortings<T>
{
List<T> GNRList;
static void SortBubble<T>()
{
//Do stuff with GNRList, which can be a list of any values (nums, strings, objects)
}
}
Now the question I'm having troubles with is this - what is the best way to compare two generic values: overloading comparison operators or having the class inherit IComparable interface? What is better and why?
If you want it to work with any type, you probably shouldn't constrain T to types that implement IComparable, because not all types do.
A simple way to work around this is to let the caller decide how to compare the objects. You just need an extra parameter:
static void SortBubble(Func<T, T, int> comparator)
{
...
}
You can call comparator with 2 arguments and it will give you a negative value, 0, or a positive value indicating that the first parameter is less than, equal to, or greater than the second parameter.
As an example, you can call SortBubble with ints like this:
var sorting = new TemplateSortings<int>();
// populate the list...
sorting.SortBubble((x, y) => x.CompareTo(y)) // pass a lambda
EDIT:
If you don't want an extra parameter and want to check the type inside the method, you can do something like this:
if (typeof(IComparable<T>).IsAssignableFrom(typeof(T))) {
// do your sorting
// you need to cast values of type "T" to "Comparable<T>" like this
// var castedValue = (IComparable<T>)tValue;
} else {
throw ...
}
You could generalize your code so it can work with any potentially valid type T:
public static IEnumerable<T> BubbleSort(
this IEnumerable<T> source,
IComparer<T> comparer == null)
{
var currentComparer = comparer ?? Comparer<T>.Default;
//bubble sort with currentComparator
}
Now, you can sort any T whatsoever, if:
T implements IComparable<T>
T implements legacy IComparable
You hand down a Comparator that knows how to compare Ts
It will fail on any other scenario the moment you attempt to perform the first comparison.
I am trying to implement an IEqualityComparer that has a tolerance on a date comparison. I have also looked into this question. The problem is that I can't use a workaround because I am using the IEqualityComparer in a LINQ .GroupJoin(). I have tried a few implementations that allow for tolerance. I can get the Equals() to work because I have both objects but I can't figure out how to implement GetHashCode().
My best attempt looks something like this:
public class ThingWithDateComparer : IEqualityComparer<IThingWithDate>
{
private readonly int _daysToAdd;
public ThingWithDateComparer(int daysToAdd)
{
_daysToAdd = daysToAdd;
}
public int GetHashCode(IThingWithDate obj)
{
unchecked
{
var hash = 17;
hash = hash * 23 + obj.BirthDate.AddDays(_daysToAdd).GetHashCode();
return hash;
}
}
public bool Equals(IThingWithDate x, IThingWithDate y)
{
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
}
public interface IThingWithDate
{
DateTime BirthDate { get; set; }
}
With .GroupJoin() building a HashTable out of the GetHashCode() it applies the days to add to both/all objects. This doesn't work.
The problem is impossible, conceptually. You're trying to compare objects in a way that doesn't have a form of equality that is necessary for the operations you're trying to perform with it. For example, GroupJoin is dependant on the assumption that if A is equal to B, and B is equal to C, then A is equal to C, but in your situation, that's not true. A and B may be "close enough" together for you to want to group them, but A and C may not be.
You're going to need to not implement IEqualityComparer at all, because you cannot fulfill the contract that it requires. If you want to create a mapping of items in one collection to all of the items in another collection that are "close enough" to it then you're going to need to write that algorithm yourself (doing so efficiently is likely to be hard, but doing so inefficiently isn't shouldn't' be that difficult), rather than using GroupJoin, because it's not capable of performing that operation.
I can't see any way to generate a logical hash code for your given criteria.
The hash code is used to determine if 2 dates should stick together. If they should group together, than they must return the same hash code.
If your "float" is 5 days, that means that 1/1/2000 must generate the same hash code as 1/4/2000, and 1/4/2000 must generate the same hashcode as 1/8/2000 (since they are both within 5 days of each other). That implies that 1/1/2000 has the same code as 1/8/2000 (since if a=b and b=c, a=c).
1/1/2000 and 1/8/2000 are outside the 5 day "float".
So, I'm doing an assignment for my C# class and I have a list of objects. These objects have an 'int rand' field which is assigned a random number. I then wanted to re-sort the objects in the list based on this rand field.
I found this article:
http://www.developerfusion.com/code/5513/sorting-and-searching-using-c-lists/
And it helped. I modified this line to fit my code:
people.Sort(delegate(Person p1, Person p2) { return p1.age.CompareTo(p2.age); });
And it does what I want.
What I want to know is: how does it work? That looks very confusing to me.
In fact Sort Method should sort base on some comparison, in your current code you passed comparison as delegate, you can also embed it in class definition to reduce code complexity, In fact it just needed to implement IComparable for your Person class:
public class Person : IComparable
{
public int age { get; set; }
public int CompareTo(object obj)
{
var person = obj as Person;
if (person != null)
{
if (age > person.age)
return 1;
else if (age == person.age)
return 0;
return -1;
}
return 1;
}
}
then simply use sort without delegates.
If you use Lambda notation with it gets a little easier to read IMO:
people.Sort((p1, p2) => p1.age.CompareTo(p2.age));
When you use the sort method you are sorting the list, but the method needs to know what to sort by, and this is where the delegation becomes handy as you can use the sort method to specify any sorting you want. You are looking at person 1 and person 2 and are ordering by age. If you wanted to sort by something else like a Name (If you had a Name property), you would write it as:
people.Sort((p1, p2) => string.Compare(p1.Name, p2.Name));
the list will use the function passed in (the return p1.age.CompareTo(p2.age); part) to compare the different objects in the list. It basically allows you to "teach" the list how you want the items compared.
The list will call your function, passing in 2 instances of the class that should be compared. you return -1 to say the 1st is less than the 2nd, 0 to say they are equal, and 1 to say the 2nd is greater. Your example just passes the call on to the built in comparison (that returns the same -1, 0, 1 pattern) for whatever type the age variable is, most likely an integer.
In order to sort, you need to be able to figure out if one item goes before or after another thing. It makes sense that this "comparator" would be a function or method as it compartmentalizes the knowledge away.
If you look at the documentation for CompareTo you'll notice that it's intended to return -1 (B goes before A), 0, (A and B are equal) or 1 (B goes after A).
The delegate keyword in this instance creates an anonymous function which is used as the comparator, and the body of that function calls CompareTo to compare the age property of the two people involved and return the result.
The result of calling this method on every potential pair of items (or some subset - I'm not sure exactly how Sort is implemented) is then used internally by the Sort method to figure out where to place the resulting item (in front of or behind of p2) in this example.
List.Sort uses Quick sort algo to sort the list. The worst case complexity is O(n ^ 2). Which means, in worst case, the delegate you provided will be called n ^ 2 times, where n is the number of items in list. Delegate is like pointer to function.
It passes the two objects it wishes to compare, and the delegate you provided will return with -1, 0, or 1. If its -1 it means that p1 is lesser then p2, if 0 it means both objects are same, if 1 it means p1 is greater then p2. So, in the end, the delegate you provide and the values it returns will decide whether the list contains objects in descending or ascending order.
Lets divide the problem so that you can understand each piece separately:
The Sort method:
This one takes a delegate, that contains the "how to" compare two elements of the list.
As soon as you teach the list how to compare to elements, then it can sort all elements, by comparing them in pairs.
The inline delegate
A inline delegate is the declaration of method, that does something.
delegate(Person p1, Person p2) { return p1.age.CompareTo(p2.age);
This delegate is telling how to compare two Person objects. You are telling this to the compiler: to compare p1 with p2, you should compare p1.age with p2.age.
Joining things
The following line of code contains both elements, the sort method, and the "how to" compare two People objects.
people.Sort(delegate(Person p1, Person p2) { return p1.age.CompareTo(p2.age); });
So now it knows how to sort the list.
Let's say I have a list of objects, and I want to sort it by the items DateModified property. Why can't I use a delegate like this? How should I sort these by DateModified if not as shown below:
public string SortByDateModified(List<CartItem> items)
{
items.Sort(new Func<CartItem, CartItem, bool>((itemA, itemB) =>
{
return itemA.DateModified < itemB.DateModified;
}));
}
Why not use a lambda expression?
public string SortByDateModified(List<CartItem> items)
{
items.Sort((a, b) => a.DateModified.CompareTo(b.DateModified));
}
If you don't want to use lambdas or greater than .NET 2.0, use this:
public string SortByDateModified(List<CartItem> items)
{
items.Sort(delegate(CartItem itemA, CartItem itemB)
{
return itemA.DateModified.CompareTo(itemB.DateModified);
});
}
In my experience, in environments such as Unity, lambdas and even delegates can cause crashes or problems, especially on platforms like iOS. In that case you would want to make your sorter a separate function like so:
int SortCartItemFunction(CartItem itemA, CartItem itemB)
{
return itemA.DateModified.CompareTo(itemB.DateModified);
}
Then you could pass it to your sort call like this:
items.Sort(SortCartItemFunction);
The Sort method takes a delegate called Comparison<T>. You're trying to pass in a Func<int, int, bool>, which is itself a delegate. There is no conversion between the delegate Func<int, int, bool> and the delegate Comparison<T>.
You can, however, use a lambda expression.
items.Sort((a, b) => a.DateModified.CompareTo(b.DateModified));
Indeed, you use this very lambda expression and pass it into the Func<int, int, bool> constructor*. However, there is no need. A lambda expression can be converted into any delegate whos signature matches - that is (a, b) => a.DateModified.CompareTo(b.DateModified) can be assigned to something typed Func<int, int, int> or something typed Comparison<T>. In this case we pass it in to something which expects a Comparison<T>.
* With one minor adjustment. Sort expectes an integer as a return type. Negative values indicate less than, 0 indicates equal, and positive values indicate greater than.
bool is not useful in such a delegate, usually int is used because you need 3 values to represent the results of the comparison, less than, equal and greater than. .NET collections usually (if not always) assume -1 means less than, 0 means equal and 1 means greater than.
You would then, in your delegate, have to check if value x is less, equal or greater than value y. An interesting thing to note here is that if you flip the results, for example compare y with x instead you will sort in the opposite direction.
For the easiest way to sort the dates, check JohnC's answer, or Sam's.
I am trying to sort a list using delegates but I am getting a signature match error. The compiler says I cannot convert from an 'anonymous method'
List<MyType> myList = GetMyList();
myList.Sort( delegate (MyType t1, MyType t2) { return (t1.ID < t2.ID); } );
What am I missing?
Here are some references I found and they do it the same way.
Developer Fusion Reference
Microsoft Reference
I think you want:
myList.Sort( delegate (MyType t1, MyType t2)
{ return (t1.ID.CompareTo(t2.ID)); }
);
To sort you need something other than "true/false", you need to know if its equal to, greater than, or less than.
The Sort doesn't take a binary predicate, it takes a Comparison<T> delegate which returns an int not a bool.
The return values are 0 for when the items are equal, <0 for when the first item is less than the second, and >0 for when the first item is greater than the second.
In future, if you want to debug problems like this, I'd advocate breaking out the delegate definition from the Sort call, like this:
Comparison<MyType> c = delegate(MyType t1, MyType t2){ ... };
myList.Sort(c);
That way, you can see if the problem is in your method call, or in your delegate definition. Some people prefer to leave it this way (with a more descriptive name than "c", obviously) to make the code more readable. I could take it or leave it =-)
The way of obj.Sort(delegate(...)); is dynamic sorting in one place. If you have several places doing the same sorting or you need more flexible sorting, you may consider to create a class implementing IComparer<T>. Here is an example:
public class MyTypeComparer : IComparer<MyType>
{
public MyTypeComparer() // default comparer on ID
{ ... }
public MyTypeComparer(bool desc) // default with order specified
public MyTypeComparer(string sort, bool desc) // specified sort and order such as property name, true or false.
{ ... }
public int Compare(MyType a, MyType b) // implement IComparer interface
{ ... } // this is real sorting codes
}
and here is the example to use it:
List<MyType> myList = GetList();
myList.Sort(new MyTypeComparer());
// myList.Sort(new MyTypeComparer(false));
// myList.Sort(new MyTypeComparer("FirstName", true));
Make sure if your ID property is the default value data type, such as Int or String. If the ID is an object reference type, that object should implement IComparer or IComparer.
Sorry for previous post. The editor does not take < and > characters, and I did not notice the preview right under the editor. If the ID property is an object type, the object should implement IComparer or IComparer<T>.