We Keep Coding

Minimum element of each column in array of arrays

An array of arrays is given. It is necessary to find the minimum element in each column and write the data to a new array. I have done the following implementation, in accordance with the given conditions. But I am having a problem:expected minimum element in each column of the array are incorrect. Where am I making a mistake?
class Program
{
static int[][] Input()
{
Console.Write("n = ");
int n = int.Parse(Console.ReadLine());
int[][] a = new int[n][];
//int[] minA = new int[n];
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{
a[i] = new int[n];
for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j)
{
Console.Write("a[{0},{1}]= ", i, j);
a[i][j] = int.Parse(Console.ReadLine());
}
}
return a;
}
static void Print(int[] a)
{
foreach (double elem in a)
{
Console.Write("{0} ", elem);
}
}
static void Print2(int[][] a)
{
for (int i = 0; i < a.Length; ++i, Console.WriteLine())
for (int j = 0; j < a[i].Length; ++j)
Console.Write("{0,5} ", a[i][j]);
}
static int[] F(int[][] a)
{
int[] b = new int[a[1].Length];
for (int j = 0; j < a[1].Length; j++)
{
int tempmin = a[0][j];
for (int i = 0; i < a[0].Length; i++)
{
if (a[j][i] <= tempmin)
{
tempmin = a[j][i];
b[j] += tempmin;
}
}
}
return b;
}
static void Main()
{
int[][] myArray = Input();
Print2(myArray);
int[] b = new int[myArray.Length];
b = F(myArray);
Print(b);
}
}

I suggest looping over all lines, while tracking all min columns values:
using System.Linq; // for the final `ToArray()`
...
private static int[] MinColumns(int[][] data) {
if (null == data)
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(data));
// List of columns' mins; initially the list is empty
List<int> list = new List<int>();
// for each line (not column!) within jagged array...
foreach (int[] line in data) {
// let's just skip null lines (alternative is to throw exception)
if (null == line)
continue;
// each new line can update columns' max values.
// now we update each column
for (int c = 0; c < line.Length; ++c)
// if index c is too big, i.e.
// the line is too long and some columns appear first time...
if (c >= list.Count)
// ...we just add values of such columns as columns' min
for (int i = list.Count; i <= c; ++i)
list.Add(line[i]);
else
// otherwise we update min values: we compare known min and current value
list[c] = Math.Min(list[c], line[c]);
}
// finally, we convert list into array with ahelp of Linq
return list.ToArray();
}
Note, that here we ignore all holes, e.g. for
int[][] demo = new int[][] {
new int[] {1, 2, 3, 4},
new int[] {5, 6}, // <- hole: we don't have 3d and 4th columns here
new int[] {7, 0, 8},
};
the answer will be {Min(1, 5, 7), Min(2, 6, 0), Min(3, 8), Min (4)} = {1, 0, 3, 4}
Edit: Usage is quite direct; something like this (fiddle yourself)
static void Main()
{
// Get jagged array
int[][] myArray = Input();
// Print it
Print2(myArray);
// Get max for each column
int[] b = MinColumns(myArray);
// Print these maxes
Print(b);
}

How to quickly move items in the row of the matrix [duplicate]

How can I quickly shift all the items in an array one to the left, padding the end with null?
For example, [0,1,2,3,4,5,6] would become [1,2,3,4,5,6,null]
Edit: I said quickly but I guess I meant efficiently. I need to do this without creating a List or some other data structure. This is something I need to do several hundred thousand times in as short amount of time as possible.

Here's my test harness...
var source = Enumerable.Range(1, 100).Cast<int?>().ToArray();
var destination = new int?[source.Length];
var s = new Stopwatch();
s.Start();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000;i++)
{
Array.Copy(source, 1, destination, 0, source.Length - 1);
}
s.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(s.Elapsed);
Here are the performance results for 1 million iterations of each solution (8 Core Intel Xeon E5450 # 3.00GHz)
100 elements 10000 elements
For Loop 0.390s 31.839s
Array.Copy() 0.177s 12.496s
Aaron 1 3.789s 84.082s
Array.ConstrainedCopy() 0.197s 17.658s
Make the choice for yourself :)

The quickest way to do this is to use Array.Copy, which in the final implementation uses a bulk memory transfer operation (similar to memcpy):
var oldArray = new int?[] { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
var newArray = new int?[oldArray.Length];
Array.Copy(oldArray, 1, newArray, 0, oldArray.Length - 1);
// newArray is now { 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, null }
Edited: according to the documentation:
If sourceArray and destinationArray overlap, this method behaves as if the original values of sourceArray were preserved in a temporary location before destinationArray is overwritten.
So if you don't want to allocate a new array, you can pass in the original array for both source and destination--although I imagine the tradeoff will be a somewhat slower performance since the values go through a temporary holding position.
I suppose, as in any investigation of this kind, you should do some quick benchmarking.

Here is my solution, similar to Task's in that it is a simple Array wrapper and that it takes O(1) time to shift the array to the left.
public class ShiftyArray<T>
{
private readonly T[] array;
private int front;
public ShiftyArray(T[] array)
{
this.array = array;
front = 0;
}
public void ShiftLeft()
{
array[front++] = default(T);
if(front > array.Length - 1)
{
front = 0;
}
}
public void ShiftLeft(int count)
{
for(int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
ShiftLeft();
}
}
public T this[int index]
{
get
{
if(index > array.Length - 1)
{
throw new IndexOutOfRangeException();
}
return array[(front + index) % array.Length];
}
}
public int Length { get { return array.Length; } }
}
Running it through Jason Punyon's test code...
int?[] intData = Enumerable.Range(1, 100).Cast<int?>().ToArray();
ShiftyArray<int?> array = new ShiftyArray<int?>(intData);
Stopwatch watch = new Stopwatch();
watch.Start();
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
{
array.ShiftLeft();
}
watch.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(watch.ElapsedMilliseconds);
Takes ~29ms, regardless of the array size.

Use the Array.Copy() method as in
int?[] myArray = new int?[]{0,1,2,3,4};
Array.Copy(myArray, 1, myArray, 0, myArray.Length - 1);
myArray[myArray.Length - 1] = null
The Array.Copy is probably the way, Microsoft wanted us to copy array elements...

Couldn't you use a System.Collections.Generic.Queue instead of an array ?
I feel like you need to perform actions on your value the discard it, thus using a queue seems to be more appropriate :
// dummy initialization
System.Collections.Generic.Queue<int> queue = new Queue<int>();
for (int i = 0; i < 7; ++i ) { queue.Enqueue(i); }// add each element at the end of the container
// working thread
if (queue.Count > 0)
doSomething(queue.Dequeue());// removes the last element of the container and calls doSomething on it

For any pour soul finding this thread and about to implement one of the highly rated answers. All of them are trash, I'm not sure why that is. Maybe Dested asked for a new array implementation at first or something that has now been removed from the question. Well if you simply want to shift the array and don't need a new one, see an answer like tdaines's answer. And read up on things like the Circular Buffer / Ring Buffer : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_buffer. No moving of the actual data is necessary. The performance of shifting an array should not be tied to the size of the array.

If it absolutely has to be in an array, then I would recommend the most obvious code possible.
for (int index = startIndex; index + 1 < values.Length; index++)
values[index] = values[index + 1];
values[values.Length - 1] = null;
This gives the optimizer the most opportunities to find the best way on whatever target platform the program is installed on.
EDIT:
I just borrowed Jason Punyon's test code, and I'm afraid he's right. Array.Copy wins!
var source = Enumerable.Range(1, 100).Cast<int?>().ToArray();
int indexToRemove = 4;
var s = new Stopwatch();
s.Start();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
{
Array.Copy(source, indexToRemove + 1, source, indexToRemove, source.Length - indexToRemove - 1);
//for (int index = indexToRemove; index + 1 < source.Length; index++)
// source[index] = source[index + 1];
}
s.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(s.Elapsed);
Array.Copy takes between 103 and 150 ms on my machine.
for loop takes between 269 and 338 ms on my machine.

Can't you
allocate the array with an extra 1000 elements
have an integer variable int base = 0
instead of accessing a[i] access a[base+i]
to do your shift, just say base++
Then after you've done this 1000 times, copy it down and start over.
That way, you only do the copy once per 1000 shifts.
Old joke:
Q: How many IBM 360s does it take to shift a register by 1 bit?
A: 33. 32 to hold the bits in place, and 1 to move the register. (or some such...)

You can use the same array as source and destination for fast in-place copy:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int[] array = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7};
Array.ConstrainedCopy(array, 1, array, 0, array.Length - 1);
array[array.Length - 1] = 0;
}

You might do it like this:
var items = new int?[] { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 }; // Your array
var itemList = new List<int?>(items); // Put the items in a List<>
itemList.RemoveAt(1); // Remove the item at index 1
itemList.Add(null); // Add a null to the end of the list
items = itemList.ToArray(); // Turn the list back into an array
Of course, it would be more efficient to get rid of the array entirely and just use a List<>. You could then forget the first line and last line and do it like this:
var itemList = new List<int?> { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
itemList.RemoveAt(1); // Remove the item at index 1
itemList.Add(null); // Add a null to the end of the list

The best and most efficient method I believe is using Buffer.BlockCopy function.
You will set both source and destination to your array, the offset of the source is 1. Depending on your array type (I assume it is int), 1 int = 4 bytes, so you must pass in 4 as the second parameter of this function. Note that the offset is byte offset.
So it looks like this:
int bytes2copy = yourArray.length - 4;
Buffer.BlockCopy(yourArray, 4, yourArray, 0, bytes2copy);
yourArray[yourArray.length-1] = null;

Try this! using Linq. No need of second Array.
var i_array = new int?[] {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
i_array = i_array.Select((v, k) => new { v = v, k = k }).
Where(i => i.k > 0).Select(i => i.v).ToArray();
Array.Resize(ref i_array, i_array.Length + 1);
Output:
[0,1,2,3,4,5,6] would become [1,2,3,4,5,6,null]

If you own the memory you could consider using Unsafe Code and good old fashioned pointers.
Make yourself a memory stream and lock it down or use Marshal.AllocHGlobal
Construct all your arrays in it with a little bit of padding at the beginning and end.
increment or decrement all of the array pointers at once. You'll still need to loop back and set your nulls.
If you need to selectively increment or decrement the arrays you would have to add padding between them.
Arrays are incredibly low level data structures, if you treat them in a low level way you can get huge performance out of them.
A baytrail doing this could outperform Jason's with all its copying 8 Core Intel Xeon E5450 # 3.00GHz

Not tested this code, but it should shifts all the values to right by one. Note that the last three lines of code is all you require to efficiently shift the array.
public class Shift : MonoBehaviour {
//Initialize Array
public int[] queue;
void Start () {
//Create Array Rows
queue = new int[5];
//Set Values to 1,2,3,4,5
for (int i=0; i<5;i++)
{
queue[i] = i + 1;
}
//Get the integer at the first index
int prev = queue[0];
//Copy the array to the new array.
System.Array.Copy(queue, 1, queue, 0, queue.Length - 1);
//Set the last shifted value to the previously first value.
queue[queue.Length - 1] = prev;

Implementation with Extension methods passing shifting direction as Enum.
"for" statements and indexers only (don't use Array.Copy method).
using System;
namespace ShiftArrayElements
{
public static class EnumShifter
{
public static int[] Shift(int[] source, Direction[] directions)
{
for (var i = 0; i < directions.Length; i++)
{
var direction = directions[i];
if (direction == Direction.Left)
{
source.LeftShift();
}
else if (direction == Direction.Right)
{
source.RightShift();
}
else
{
throw new InvalidOperationException("Direction is invalid");
}
}
return source;
}
public static void LeftShift(this int[] source)
{
var lastIndex = source?.Length - 1 ?? 0;
var temp = source[0];
for (int j = 0; j + 1 < source.Length; j++)
{
source[j] = source[j + 1];
}
source[lastIndex] = temp;
}
public static void RightShift(this int[] source)
{
var lastIndex = source?.Length - 1 ?? 0;
var temp = source[lastIndex];
for (int j = lastIndex; j > 0; j--)
{
source[j] = source[j - 1];
}
source[0] = temp;
}
}
}

Array copying is an O(n) operation and creates a new array.
While array copying can certainly be done quickly and efficiently, the problem you've stated can actually be solved in an entirely different way without (as you've requested) creating a new array/data structure and only creating one small wrapping object instance per array:
using System;
using System.Text;
public class ArrayReindexer
{
private Array reindexed;
private int location, offset;
public ArrayReindexer( Array source )
{
reindexed = source;
}
public object this[int index]
{
get
{
if (offset > 0 && index >= location)
{
int adjustedIndex = index + offset;
return adjustedIndex >= reindexed.Length ? "null" : reindexed.GetValue( adjustedIndex );
}
return reindexed.GetValue( index );
}
}
public void Reindex( int position, int shiftAmount )
{
location = position;
offset = shiftAmount;
}
public override string ToString()
{
StringBuilder output = new StringBuilder( "[ " );
for (int i = 0; i < reindexed.Length; ++i)
{
output.Append( this[i] );
if (i == reindexed.Length - 1)
{
output.Append( " ]" );
}
else
{
output.Append( ", " );
}
}
return output.ToString();
}
}
By wrapping and controlling access to the array in this manner, we can now demonstrate how the problem was solved with an O(1) method call...
ArrayReindexer original = new ArrayReindexer( SourceArray );
Console.WriteLine( " Base array: {0}", original.ToString() );
ArrayReindexer reindexed = new ArrayReindexer( SourceArray );
reindexed.Reindex( 1, 1 );
Console.WriteLine( "Shifted array: {0}", reindexed.ToString() );
Will produce the output:
Base array: [ 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ]
Shifted array: [ 0, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, null ]
I'm willing to bet that there will be a reason that such a solution won't work for you, but I believe this does match your initial stated requirements. 8 )
It's often helpful to think about all the different kinds of solutions to a problem before implementing a specific one, and perhaps that might be the most important thing that this example can demonstrate.
Hope this helps!

Incorrect and slightly amusing answer (thanks, i'll be here all night !)
int?[] test = new int?[] {0,1,2,3,4,5,6 };
int?[] t = new int?[test.Length];
t = test.Skip(1).ToArray();
t[t.Length - 1] = null;
In the spirit of still using Skip (dont ask me, i know worst usage of LINQ extension methods ever), the only way I thought of rewriting it would be
int?[] test = new int?[] { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
int?[] t = new int?[test.Length];
Array.Copy(test.Skip(1).ToArray(), t, t.Length - 1);
But it's in NO WAY faster than the other options.

I know this is an old question but coming from Google there was no simple example so thanks to this is the easiest way to reorder a list, and you don't have to supply the type it will work it out at runtime,
private static List<T> reorderList<T>(List<T> list){
List<T> newList = new List<T>();
list.ForEach(delegate(T item)
{
newList.Add(item);
});
return newList;
}

using System;
using System.Threading;
namespace ShiftMatrix
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
MatrixOperation objMatrixOperation = new MatrixOperation();
//Create a matrix
int[,] mat = new int[,]
{
{1, 2},
{3,4 },
{5, 6},
{7,8},
{8,9},
};
int type = 2;
int counter = 0;
if (type == 1)
{
counter = mat.GetLength(0);
}
else
{
counter = mat.GetLength(1);
}
while (true)
{
for (int i = 0; i < counter; i++)
{
ShowMatrix(objMatrixOperation.ShiftMatrix(mat, i, type));
Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(2));
}
}
}
public static void ShowMatrix(int[,] matrix)
{
int rows = matrix.GetLength(0);
int columns = matrix.GetLength(1);
for (int k = 0; k < rows; k++)
{
for (int l = 0; l < columns; l++)
{
Console.Write(matrix[k, l] + " ");
}
Console.WriteLine();
}
}
}
class MatrixOperation
{
public int[,] ShiftMatrix(int[,] origanalMatrix, int shift, int type)
{
int rows = origanalMatrix.GetLength(0);
int cols = origanalMatrix.GetLength(1);
int[,] _tmpMatrix = new int[rows, cols];
if (type == 2)
{
for (int x1 = 0; x1 < rows; x1++)
{
int y2 = 0;
for (int y1 = shift; y2 < cols - shift; y1++, y2++)
{
_tmpMatrix[x1, y2] = origanalMatrix[x1, y1];
}
y2--;
for (int y1 = 0; y1 < shift; y1++, y2++)
{
_tmpMatrix[x1, y2] = origanalMatrix[x1, y1];
}
}
}
else
{
int x2 = 0;
for (int x1 = shift; x2 < rows - shift; x1++, x2++)
{
for (int y1 = 0; y1 < cols; y1++)
{
_tmpMatrix[x2, y1] = origanalMatrix[x1, y1];
}
}
x2--;
for (int x1 = 0; x1 < shift; x1++, x2++)
{
for (int y1 = 0; y1 < cols; y1++)
{
_tmpMatrix[x2, y1] = origanalMatrix[x1, y1];
}
}
}
return _tmpMatrix;
}
}
}

See C# code below to remove space from string. That shift character in array. Performance is O(n). No other array is used. So no extra memory either.
static void Main(string[] args)
{
string strIn = System.Console.ReadLine();
char[] chraryIn = strIn.ToCharArray();
int iShift = 0;
char chrTemp;
for (int i = 0; i < chraryIn.Length; ++i)
{
if (i > 0)
{
chrTemp = chraryIn[i];
chraryIn[i - iShift] = chrTemp;
chraryIn[i] = chraryIn[i - iShift];
}
if (chraryIn[i] == ' ') iShift++;
if (i >= chraryIn.Length - 1 - iShift) chraryIn[i] = ' ';
}
System.Console.WriteLine(new string(chraryIn));
System.Console.Read();
}

a is array of ints & d is number of times array has to shift left.
static int[] rotLeft(int[] a, int d)
{
var innerLoop = a.Length - 1;
for(var loop=0; loop < d; loop++)
{
var res = a[innerLoop];
for (var i= innerLoop; i>=0; i--)
{
var tempI = i-1;
if (tempI < 0)
{
tempI = innerLoop;
}
var yolo = a[tempI];
a[tempI] = res;
res = yolo;
}
}
return a;
}

Simple way to do it when you need to resize the same array.
var nLength = args.Length - 1;
Array.Copy(args, 1, args, 0, nLength);
Array.Resize(ref args, nLength);

How to find the longest sequence of equal elements in an array of integers?

I want to write a program that finds the longest sequence of equal elements in an array of integers. If several longest sequences exist, we should print the leftmost one. e.g. Input: 0 1 1 5 2 2 6 3 3
Output: 1 1
I know that my code doesn't work correctly, but I don't know how to fix it. I should solve the problem using only arrays because I don't know how to use lists.
int[] numbers = Console.ReadLine().Split().Select(int.Parse).ToArray();
for (int i = 0; i < numbers.Length; i++)
{
int[] currentSequenceOfEqualElements = new int[numbers.Length];
for (int j = i + 1; j < numbers.Length; j++)
{
if (numbers[i] == numbers[j])
{
if (currentSequenceOfEqualElements[0] == 0)
{
currentSequenceOfEqualElements[0] = numbers[i];
currentSequenceOfEqualElements[1] = numbers[i];
}
else
{
currentSequenceOfEqualElements[i + 2] = numbers[i];
}
}
else
{
break;
}
}
Console.WriteLine(string.Join(' ', currentSequenceOfEqualElements));
}
I will be very grateful if you can explain to me how to do it.

Here is the solution using the MoreLinq library (https://morelinq.github.io/) that mjwills suggested.
Once you get used to linq and morelinq methods the code is easier to understand than custom algo with nested loops and if.
var numbers = new int[]{ 0, 1, 1, 5, 2, 2, 6, 3, 3};
var result = numbers.GroupAdjacent(x => x)
.MaxBy(x => x.Count())
.FirstOrDefault();
foreach (var i in result)
{
Console.Write($"{i} ");
}

Here's a simple solution, using only loops and no linq. It should be nice and easy to understand.
int[] numbers = new[] { 0, 1, 1, 5, 2, 2, 6, 3, 3 };
// Some variables to keep track of the sequence we're currently looking
// at, and the longest sequence we've found so far. We're going to start
// the loop at the 2nd number, so we'll initialize these as if we've
// already processed the first number (which is 0, so we've seen the
// first number of a sequence of 0's).
// Number of numbers in the current sequence
int count = 1;
// Number which is part of the longest sequence so faar
int longestNum = numbers[0];
// Number of numbers in the longest sequence we've seen so far
int longestCount = 1;
for (int i = 1; i < numbers.Length; i++)
{
// We're starting a new sequence
if (numbers[i] != numbers[i-1])
{
count = 0;
}
count++;
// Have we just found a new longest sequence?
if (count > longestCount)
{
longestCount = count;
longestNum = numbers[i];
}
}
// longestNum = 1 and longestCount = 2 (because the longest sequence
// had 2 1's in it). Turn this into the string "1 1".
Console.WriteLine(
string.Join(" ", Enumerable.Repeat(longestNum, longestCount)));
// If you wanted to end up with an array containing [1, 1], then:
int[] result = new int[longestCount];
Array.Fill(result, longestNum);

I will illustrate a recursive answer for your question, below is the code, I kept some if-else statements that there is no need to have them, but at least the code shows the idea.
The code has a basic method that should be exposed as public and a private recursive method that does the heavy lifting. The longest sequence is the empty array(list)
var longSequenceEqualElem = new List<int>();
Later on the recursion, you pass all the elems of the array through all the recursion calls to keep querying the positions, the pos parameter indicates the position level of the recursion.
if (pos < elems.Length) //stop the recursion here, the position will fall out of the indexes of the array, just return what you have in sequence that should be the longest.
The following statement if (sequence.Contains(elems[pos])) means that you found the same number you were carrying on the sequence in the position pos, so you can add it to the sequence and call the recursion with the adjacent position(pos + 1)
If the element in position pos is not part of the sequence you had, then you need to call the recursion with a new sequence containing elems[pos] and later compare the result of that recursion call with the sequence you had to see which of them is the longest one.
Hope this helps
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var elemts = new int[] { 0, 1, 1, 5, 2, 2, 6, 3, 3 };
var result = LongestSequence(elemts);
foreach (var i in result)
{
Console.Write(i + "\t");
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
public static int[] LongestSequence(int[] elems)
{
var longSequenceEqualElem = new List<int>();
return LongestSequenceRec(elems, longSequenceEqualElem, 0);
}
private static int[] LongestSequenceRec(int[] elems, List<int> sequence, int pos)
{
if (pos < elems.Length)
{
if (sequence.Contains(elems[pos]))
{
sequence.Add(elems[pos]);
return LongestSequenceRec(elems, sequence, pos + 1);
}
else
{
var newSeq = LongestSequenceRec(elems, new List<int> { elems[pos] }, pos + 1);
return (newSeq.Length > sequence.Count) ? newSeq.ToArray() : sequence.ToArray();
}
}
return sequence.ToArray();
}
}

static void Main()
{
int[] array1 = new int[9] {0, 1, 1, 5, 2, 2, 6, 3, 3};
int[] array2 = new int[9] {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0};
int max_count = 1;
int tempCount = 1;
int num = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < array1.Length - 1; i++)
{
if (array1[i] == array1[i + 1]) tempCount++;
else tempCount = 1;
if (tempCount > max_count)
{
max_count = tempCount;
num = array1[i];
}
}
for (int i = 0; i < max_count; i++) array2[i] = num;
for (int i = 0; i < max_count; i++) Console.Write(array2[i] + " ");
Console.ReadKey();
}

Moving the first array element to end in C#

This is a basic question ( I am new to C#), but is there an efficient way to move the first element to the end of the array in C#?
I found this question, which describes the .rotate method in ruby, but I have been unable to find a similar method in C#.
If I have an array:
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Is there a function in C# that returns:
[2, 3, 4, 5, 1]
Thanks in advance!
EDIT: Answer
The best solution is to use LinkedList<T> as many of you suggested and as shown in Alex's answer. His suggested solution was using:
list.AddLast(list.RemoveFirst());
which can be run in a for loop:
void func<T>(LinkedList<T> list, int rotate) {
for(var i = 0; i < rotate; i++) {
list.AddLast(list.RemoveFirst());
}
}
Thank you all for your help!

There are many ways to achieve this. One way would be:
var result = arr.Skip(1).Concat(arr.Take(1))

If you use LinkedList<T> instead of array<T> you could just use this:
list.AddLast(list.RemoveAndGetFirst());
Edit: RemoveAndGetFirst() can be an extension like:
LinkedListNode<T> elem = list.First;
list.RemoveFirst();
return elem;
Complexity O(1). When you perform this multiple times:
void func<T>(LinkedList<T> list, int rotate) {
for(var i = 0; i < rotate; i++) {
list.AddLast(list.RemoveFirst());
}
}
You will have a complexity of O(N) [where N is the number of rotations]. This is, performance wise, the best solution.
If you really need to use arrays this could be a naiv solution:
var tmp = list[0];
for(var i = 1; i < list.Length; i++) {
list[i - 1] = list[i];
}
list[list.Length - 1] = tmp;
(Be aware there are no range checks)
But this will be very time consuming if you need to do this often. If you perform this multiple times:
void func<T>(T[] list, int rotate) {
for(var j = 0; j < rotate; j++) {
var tmp = list[0];
for(var i = 1; i < list.Length; i++) {
list[i - 1] = list[i];
}
list[list.Length - 1] = tmp;
}
}
You will end up with O(N^2) = O(N * M) [where N is the number of elements and M the number of rotations]. This would be really bad. A better approach, if you know in advance you'll perform this often would be:
void func<T>(T[] list, int rotate {
for(var j = 0; j < list.Length; j++) {
var tmp = list[j];
var ix = (rotate + j) % list.Length;
list[j] = list[ix];
list[ix] = tmp;
}
}
Which will result in O(N) [where N is the number of elements].
As others already suggested, it's a good idea to write an extension method if you need this at multiple locations.

Using Array.Copy to copy elements to itself just shifted ;)
var array = new int[]{1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
var head = array[0];
Array.Copy(array, 1, array, 0, array.Length- 1);
array[array.Length - 1] = head;
And as an extension method returning a new array just like the Ruby version
static class ArrayRotateExtensions {
public static int[] Rotate(this int[] arr, int offset) {
var l = arr.Length;
var rot = new int[l];
if (offset == 0) {
Array.Copy(arr, 0, rot, 0, l);
return rot;
}
// constrain rotations greater than array length, it's the same result anyway
offset = offset % l;
// negative rotation is equal to positive rotation length - offset
if (offset < 0) {
offset += l;
}
Array.Copy(arr, offset, rot, 0, l - offset);
Array.Copy(arr, 0, rot, l - offset, offset);
return rot;
}
}
This will allow you to do
var array = new int[]{1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
var rotated = array.Rotate(1);
Plus rotation by any arbitrary amount.
Only downside is you'd have to add a version for every array type you'd like to use it on.

It's starting to look like Code Golf now :-) so here's my contribution:
var x = new[] { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
var y = Enumerable.Range(1, x.Length).Select(i => x[i % x.Length]).ToArray();

The reason why there is no function like that in LINQ is most likely that people who developed LINQ didn't think it's something that is an absolute must...
If you really need that you can create an extension method.
Something along the lines of:
public static IEnumerable<T> Rotate<T>(this IEnumerable<T> elements, int number)
{
var elemetsList = elements as IList<T> ?? elements.ToList();
var list = new List<T>(elemetsList.Count);
if (number > elemetsList.Count - 1)
{
throw new ArgumentException(nameof(number));
}
for (int i = number; i < elemetsList.Count; i++)
{
list.Add(elemetsList[i]);
}
for (int i = 0; i < number; i++)
{
list.Add(elemetsList[i]);
}
return list;
}
And use it:
var arr = new int[] {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
int[] result = arr.Rotate(1).ToArray();
int[] result2 = arr.Rotate(3).ToArray();
Output:
2 3 4 5 1
4 5 1 2 3
This solution is fairly efficient.
For an array 500 000 in length it took only 7ms on my machine to execute.

Try this one..
using System;
public class Program
{
public static int[] arrData = new int[5]{1,2,3,4,5};
public static void Main()
{
Console.WriteLine("\nOriginal array\n");
foreach(var item in arrData)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.ToString());
}
Console.WriteLine("\nShift to last\n");
arrData = shiftLast(arrData);
foreach(var item in arrData)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.ToString());
}
}
public static int[] shiftLast(int[] arr)
{
int last = arr[arr.Length - 1];
int first= arr[0];
arr[arr.Length - 1] = first;
arr[0] = last;
return arr;
}
}
Try to run here
Cheers

Maybe like this -
static void Main( string[] args ) {
Console.WriteLine(string.Join(", ", getArray(new int[] { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 })));
Console.Read();
return;
}
static int[] getArray( int[] arr ) {
List<int> O = new List<int>();
for (int x = 1, l = arr.Length; x < l; x++) {
O.Add(arr[x]);
}
O.Add(arr[0]);
return O.ToArray();
}

As far as I know there isn't such method for an array. If you do this often perhaps you should consider using a different object (List<T>, Stack<T>, etc).
But even with an array you can implement simple functionality like this using extension methods:
public static int[] MoveFirstToLast (this int[] obj)
{
int movedValue = obj[0];
(int i = 1; i < obj.Length; i++)
{
obj[i - 1] = obj[i];
}
obj[obj.Length - 1] = movedValue;
return obj;
}
And then the use is just:
int[] myArray = //whatever;
int[] changedArray = myArray.MoveFirstToLast();

C# quickest way to shift array

How can I quickly shift all the items in an array one to the left, padding the end with null?
For example, [0,1,2,3,4,5,6] would become [1,2,3,4,5,6,null]
Edit: I said quickly but I guess I meant efficiently. I need to do this without creating a List or some other data structure. This is something I need to do several hundred thousand times in as short amount of time as possible.

Here's my test harness...
var source = Enumerable.Range(1, 100).Cast<int?>().ToArray();
var destination = new int?[source.Length];
var s = new Stopwatch();
s.Start();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000;i++)
{
Array.Copy(source, 1, destination, 0, source.Length - 1);
}
s.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(s.Elapsed);
Here are the performance results for 1 million iterations of each solution (8 Core Intel Xeon E5450 # 3.00GHz)
100 elements 10000 elements
For Loop 0.390s 31.839s
Array.Copy() 0.177s 12.496s
Aaron 1 3.789s 84.082s
Array.ConstrainedCopy() 0.197s 17.658s
Make the choice for yourself :)

The quickest way to do this is to use Array.Copy, which in the final implementation uses a bulk memory transfer operation (similar to memcpy):
var oldArray = new int?[] { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
var newArray = new int?[oldArray.Length];
Array.Copy(oldArray, 1, newArray, 0, oldArray.Length - 1);
// newArray is now { 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, null }
Edited: according to the documentation:
If sourceArray and destinationArray overlap, this method behaves as if the original values of sourceArray were preserved in a temporary location before destinationArray is overwritten.
So if you don't want to allocate a new array, you can pass in the original array for both source and destination--although I imagine the tradeoff will be a somewhat slower performance since the values go through a temporary holding position.
I suppose, as in any investigation of this kind, you should do some quick benchmarking.

Here is my solution, similar to Task's in that it is a simple Array wrapper and that it takes O(1) time to shift the array to the left.
public class ShiftyArray<T>
{
private readonly T[] array;
private int front;
public ShiftyArray(T[] array)
{
this.array = array;
front = 0;
}
public void ShiftLeft()
{
array[front++] = default(T);
if(front > array.Length - 1)
{
front = 0;
}
}
public void ShiftLeft(int count)
{
for(int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
ShiftLeft();
}
}
public T this[int index]
{
get
{
if(index > array.Length - 1)
{
throw new IndexOutOfRangeException();
}
return array[(front + index) % array.Length];
}
}
public int Length { get { return array.Length; } }
}
Running it through Jason Punyon's test code...
int?[] intData = Enumerable.Range(1, 100).Cast<int?>().ToArray();
ShiftyArray<int?> array = new ShiftyArray<int?>(intData);
Stopwatch watch = new Stopwatch();
watch.Start();
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
{
array.ShiftLeft();
}
watch.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(watch.ElapsedMilliseconds);
Takes ~29ms, regardless of the array size.

Use the Array.Copy() method as in
int?[] myArray = new int?[]{0,1,2,3,4};
Array.Copy(myArray, 1, myArray, 0, myArray.Length - 1);
myArray[myArray.Length - 1] = null
The Array.Copy is probably the way, Microsoft wanted us to copy array elements...

Couldn't you use a System.Collections.Generic.Queue instead of an array ?
I feel like you need to perform actions on your value the discard it, thus using a queue seems to be more appropriate :
// dummy initialization
System.Collections.Generic.Queue<int> queue = new Queue<int>();
for (int i = 0; i < 7; ++i ) { queue.Enqueue(i); }// add each element at the end of the container
// working thread
if (queue.Count > 0)
doSomething(queue.Dequeue());// removes the last element of the container and calls doSomething on it

For any pour soul finding this thread and about to implement one of the highly rated answers. All of them are trash, I'm not sure why that is. Maybe Dested asked for a new array implementation at first or something that has now been removed from the question. Well if you simply want to shift the array and don't need a new one, see an answer like tdaines's answer. And read up on things like the Circular Buffer / Ring Buffer : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_buffer. No moving of the actual data is necessary. The performance of shifting an array should not be tied to the size of the array.

If it absolutely has to be in an array, then I would recommend the most obvious code possible.
for (int index = startIndex; index + 1 < values.Length; index++)
values[index] = values[index + 1];
values[values.Length - 1] = null;
This gives the optimizer the most opportunities to find the best way on whatever target platform the program is installed on.
EDIT:
I just borrowed Jason Punyon's test code, and I'm afraid he's right. Array.Copy wins!
var source = Enumerable.Range(1, 100).Cast<int?>().ToArray();
int indexToRemove = 4;
var s = new Stopwatch();
s.Start();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
{
Array.Copy(source, indexToRemove + 1, source, indexToRemove, source.Length - indexToRemove - 1);
//for (int index = indexToRemove; index + 1 < source.Length; index++)
// source[index] = source[index + 1];
}
s.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(s.Elapsed);
Array.Copy takes between 103 and 150 ms on my machine.
for loop takes between 269 and 338 ms on my machine.

Can't you
allocate the array with an extra 1000 elements
have an integer variable int base = 0
instead of accessing a[i] access a[base+i]
to do your shift, just say base++
Then after you've done this 1000 times, copy it down and start over.
That way, you only do the copy once per 1000 shifts.
Old joke:
Q: How many IBM 360s does it take to shift a register by 1 bit?
A: 33. 32 to hold the bits in place, and 1 to move the register. (or some such...)

You can use the same array as source and destination for fast in-place copy:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int[] array = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7};
Array.ConstrainedCopy(array, 1, array, 0, array.Length - 1);
array[array.Length - 1] = 0;
}

You might do it like this:
var items = new int?[] { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 }; // Your array
var itemList = new List<int?>(items); // Put the items in a List<>
itemList.RemoveAt(1); // Remove the item at index 1
itemList.Add(null); // Add a null to the end of the list
items = itemList.ToArray(); // Turn the list back into an array
Of course, it would be more efficient to get rid of the array entirely and just use a List<>. You could then forget the first line and last line and do it like this:
var itemList = new List<int?> { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
itemList.RemoveAt(1); // Remove the item at index 1
itemList.Add(null); // Add a null to the end of the list

The best and most efficient method I believe is using Buffer.BlockCopy function.
You will set both source and destination to your array, the offset of the source is 1. Depending on your array type (I assume it is int), 1 int = 4 bytes, so you must pass in 4 as the second parameter of this function. Note that the offset is byte offset.
So it looks like this:
int bytes2copy = yourArray.length - 4;
Buffer.BlockCopy(yourArray, 4, yourArray, 0, bytes2copy);
yourArray[yourArray.length-1] = null;

Try this! using Linq. No need of second Array.
var i_array = new int?[] {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
i_array = i_array.Select((v, k) => new { v = v, k = k }).
Where(i => i.k > 0).Select(i => i.v).ToArray();
Array.Resize(ref i_array, i_array.Length + 1);
Output:
[0,1,2,3,4,5,6] would become [1,2,3,4,5,6,null]

If you own the memory you could consider using Unsafe Code and good old fashioned pointers.
Make yourself a memory stream and lock it down or use Marshal.AllocHGlobal
Construct all your arrays in it with a little bit of padding at the beginning and end.
increment or decrement all of the array pointers at once. You'll still need to loop back and set your nulls.
If you need to selectively increment or decrement the arrays you would have to add padding between them.
Arrays are incredibly low level data structures, if you treat them in a low level way you can get huge performance out of them.
A baytrail doing this could outperform Jason's with all its copying 8 Core Intel Xeon E5450 # 3.00GHz

Not tested this code, but it should shifts all the values to right by one. Note that the last three lines of code is all you require to efficiently shift the array.
public class Shift : MonoBehaviour {
//Initialize Array
public int[] queue;
void Start () {
//Create Array Rows
queue = new int[5];
//Set Values to 1,2,3,4,5
for (int i=0; i<5;i++)
{
queue[i] = i + 1;
}
//Get the integer at the first index
int prev = queue[0];
//Copy the array to the new array.
System.Array.Copy(queue, 1, queue, 0, queue.Length - 1);
//Set the last shifted value to the previously first value.
queue[queue.Length - 1] = prev;

Implementation with Extension methods passing shifting direction as Enum.
"for" statements and indexers only (don't use Array.Copy method).
using System;
namespace ShiftArrayElements
{
public static class EnumShifter
{
public static int[] Shift(int[] source, Direction[] directions)
{
for (var i = 0; i < directions.Length; i++)
{
var direction = directions[i];
if (direction == Direction.Left)
{
source.LeftShift();
}
else if (direction == Direction.Right)
{
source.RightShift();
}
else
{
throw new InvalidOperationException("Direction is invalid");
}
}
return source;
}
public static void LeftShift(this int[] source)
{
var lastIndex = source?.Length - 1 ?? 0;
var temp = source[0];
for (int j = 0; j + 1 < source.Length; j++)
{
source[j] = source[j + 1];
}
source[lastIndex] = temp;
}
public static void RightShift(this int[] source)
{
var lastIndex = source?.Length - 1 ?? 0;
var temp = source[lastIndex];
for (int j = lastIndex; j > 0; j--)
{
source[j] = source[j - 1];
}
source[0] = temp;
}
}
}

Array copying is an O(n) operation and creates a new array.
While array copying can certainly be done quickly and efficiently, the problem you've stated can actually be solved in an entirely different way without (as you've requested) creating a new array/data structure and only creating one small wrapping object instance per array:
using System;
using System.Text;
public class ArrayReindexer
{
private Array reindexed;
private int location, offset;
public ArrayReindexer( Array source )
{
reindexed = source;
}
public object this[int index]
{
get
{
if (offset > 0 && index >= location)
{
int adjustedIndex = index + offset;
return adjustedIndex >= reindexed.Length ? "null" : reindexed.GetValue( adjustedIndex );
}
return reindexed.GetValue( index );
}
}
public void Reindex( int position, int shiftAmount )
{
location = position;
offset = shiftAmount;
}
public override string ToString()
{
StringBuilder output = new StringBuilder( "[ " );
for (int i = 0; i < reindexed.Length; ++i)
{
output.Append( this[i] );
if (i == reindexed.Length - 1)
{
output.Append( " ]" );
}
else
{
output.Append( ", " );
}
}
return output.ToString();
}
}
By wrapping and controlling access to the array in this manner, we can now demonstrate how the problem was solved with an O(1) method call...
ArrayReindexer original = new ArrayReindexer( SourceArray );
Console.WriteLine( " Base array: {0}", original.ToString() );
ArrayReindexer reindexed = new ArrayReindexer( SourceArray );
reindexed.Reindex( 1, 1 );
Console.WriteLine( "Shifted array: {0}", reindexed.ToString() );
Will produce the output:
Base array: [ 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ]
Shifted array: [ 0, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, null ]
I'm willing to bet that there will be a reason that such a solution won't work for you, but I believe this does match your initial stated requirements. 8 )
It's often helpful to think about all the different kinds of solutions to a problem before implementing a specific one, and perhaps that might be the most important thing that this example can demonstrate.
Hope this helps!

Incorrect and slightly amusing answer (thanks, i'll be here all night !)
int?[] test = new int?[] {0,1,2,3,4,5,6 };
int?[] t = new int?[test.Length];
t = test.Skip(1).ToArray();
t[t.Length - 1] = null;
In the spirit of still using Skip (dont ask me, i know worst usage of LINQ extension methods ever), the only way I thought of rewriting it would be
int?[] test = new int?[] { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
int?[] t = new int?[test.Length];
Array.Copy(test.Skip(1).ToArray(), t, t.Length - 1);
But it's in NO WAY faster than the other options.

I know this is an old question but coming from Google there was no simple example so thanks to this is the easiest way to reorder a list, and you don't have to supply the type it will work it out at runtime,
private static List<T> reorderList<T>(List<T> list){
List<T> newList = new List<T>();
list.ForEach(delegate(T item)
{
newList.Add(item);
});
return newList;
}

using System;
using System.Threading;
namespace ShiftMatrix
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
MatrixOperation objMatrixOperation = new MatrixOperation();
//Create a matrix
int[,] mat = new int[,]
{
{1, 2},
{3,4 },
{5, 6},
{7,8},
{8,9},
};
int type = 2;
int counter = 0;
if (type == 1)
{
counter = mat.GetLength(0);
}
else
{
counter = mat.GetLength(1);
}
while (true)
{
for (int i = 0; i < counter; i++)
{
ShowMatrix(objMatrixOperation.ShiftMatrix(mat, i, type));
Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(2));
}
}
}
public static void ShowMatrix(int[,] matrix)
{
int rows = matrix.GetLength(0);
int columns = matrix.GetLength(1);
for (int k = 0; k < rows; k++)
{
for (int l = 0; l < columns; l++)
{
Console.Write(matrix[k, l] + " ");
}
Console.WriteLine();
}
}
}
class MatrixOperation
{
public int[,] ShiftMatrix(int[,] origanalMatrix, int shift, int type)
{
int rows = origanalMatrix.GetLength(0);
int cols = origanalMatrix.GetLength(1);
int[,] _tmpMatrix = new int[rows, cols];
if (type == 2)
{
for (int x1 = 0; x1 < rows; x1++)
{
int y2 = 0;
for (int y1 = shift; y2 < cols - shift; y1++, y2++)
{
_tmpMatrix[x1, y2] = origanalMatrix[x1, y1];
}
y2--;
for (int y1 = 0; y1 < shift; y1++, y2++)
{
_tmpMatrix[x1, y2] = origanalMatrix[x1, y1];
}
}
}
else
{
int x2 = 0;
for (int x1 = shift; x2 < rows - shift; x1++, x2++)
{
for (int y1 = 0; y1 < cols; y1++)
{
_tmpMatrix[x2, y1] = origanalMatrix[x1, y1];
}
}
x2--;
for (int x1 = 0; x1 < shift; x1++, x2++)
{
for (int y1 = 0; y1 < cols; y1++)
{
_tmpMatrix[x2, y1] = origanalMatrix[x1, y1];
}
}
}
return _tmpMatrix;
}
}
}

See C# code below to remove space from string. That shift character in array. Performance is O(n). No other array is used. So no extra memory either.
static void Main(string[] args)
{
string strIn = System.Console.ReadLine();
char[] chraryIn = strIn.ToCharArray();
int iShift = 0;
char chrTemp;
for (int i = 0; i < chraryIn.Length; ++i)
{
if (i > 0)
{
chrTemp = chraryIn[i];
chraryIn[i - iShift] = chrTemp;
chraryIn[i] = chraryIn[i - iShift];
}
if (chraryIn[i] == ' ') iShift++;
if (i >= chraryIn.Length - 1 - iShift) chraryIn[i] = ' ';
}
System.Console.WriteLine(new string(chraryIn));
System.Console.Read();
}

a is array of ints & d is number of times array has to shift left.
static int[] rotLeft(int[] a, int d)
{
var innerLoop = a.Length - 1;
for(var loop=0; loop < d; loop++)
{
var res = a[innerLoop];
for (var i= innerLoop; i>=0; i--)
{
var tempI = i-1;
if (tempI < 0)
{
tempI = innerLoop;
}
var yolo = a[tempI];
a[tempI] = res;
res = yolo;
}
}
return a;
}

Simple way to do it when you need to resize the same array.
var nLength = args.Length - 1;
Array.Copy(args, 1, args, 0, nLength);
Array.Resize(ref args, nLength);