var subset = new[] { 9, 3, 9 };
var superset = new[] { 9, 10, 5, 3, 3, 3 };
subset.All(s => superset.Contains(s))
This code would return true, because 9 is included in the superset,but only once, I want an implementation that would take into account the duplicates, so it would return false
My thought was that you could group both sets by count, then test that the super group list contained every key from the sub group list and, in each case, the super count was greater than or equal to the corresponding subcount. I think that I've achieved that with the following:
var subset = new[] { 9, 3, 9 };
var superset = new[] { 9, 10, 5, 3, 3, 3 };
var subGroups = subset.GroupBy(n => n).ToArray();
var superGroups = superset.GroupBy(n => n).ToArray();
var basicResult = subset.All(n => superset.Contains(n));
var advancedResult = subGroups.All(subg => superGroups.Any(supg => subg.Key == supg.Key && subg.Count() <= supg.Count()));
Console.WriteLine(basicResult);
Console.WriteLine(advancedResult);
I did a few extra tests and it seemed to work but you can test some additional data sets to be sure.
Here is another solution :
var subset = new[] { 9, 3, 9 };
var superset = new[] { 9, 10, 5, 3, 3, 3 };
var subsetGroup = subset.GroupBy(x => x).Select(x => new { key = x.Key, count = x.Count() });
var supersetDict = superset.GroupBy(x => x).ToDictionary(x => x.Key, y => y.Count());
Boolean results = subsetGroup.All(x => supersetDict[x.key] >= x.count);
This works for me:
var subsetLookup = subset.ToLookup(x => x);
var supersetLookup = superset.ToLookup(x => x);
bool flag =
subsetLookup
.All(x => supersetLookup[x.Key].Count() >= subsetLookup[x.Key].Count());
That's not how sets and set operations work. Sets cannot contain duplicates.
You should treat the two arrays not as sets, but as (unordered) sequences. A possible algorithm would be: make a list from the sequence superset, then remove one by one each element of the sequence subset from the list until you are unable to find such an element in the list.
bool IsSubList(IEnumerable<int> sub, IEnumerable<int> super)
{
var list = super.ToList();
foreach (var item in sub)
{
if (!list.Remove(item))
return false; // not found in list, so sub is not a "sub-list" of super
}
return true; // all elements of sub were found in super
}
var subset = new[] { 9, 3 };
var superset = new[] { 9, 10, 5, 3,1, 3, 3 };
var isSubSet = IsSubList(subset, superset);
I am trying to get the most frequent values in an array using LINQ in C#.
For example,
int[] input = {1, 1, 1, 3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8};
output = {1, 6}
int[] input = {1, 2, 2, 3 ,3, 3, 5}
output = {3}
Please let me know how to build LINQ.
Please read be careful.
This is a different problem with Select most frequent value using LINQ
I have to choose only the most frequent values. The code below is similar, but I can't use Take(5) because I don't know the number of results.
int[] nums = new[] { 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7 };
IEnumerable<int> top5 = nums
.GroupBy(i => i)
.OrderByDescending(g => g.Count())
.Take(5)
.Select(g => g.Key);
this output is {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}
but my expected output = {1, 2}
Please read the questions carefully and answer.
Thanks and regards.
Just to add to the plethora of answers:
int[] input = { 1, 1, 1, 3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8 };
var result = input
.GroupBy(i => i)
.GroupBy(g => g.Count())
.OrderByDescending(g => g.Key)
.First()
.Select(g => g.Key)
.ToArray();
Console.WriteLine(string.Join(", ", result)); // Prints "1, 6"
[EDIT]
In case anyone finds this interesting, I compared the performance of the above between .net 4.8 and .net 5.0 as follows:
(1) Added a Comparer class to instrument the number of comparisons made:
class Comparer : IComparer<int>
{
public int Compare(int x, int y)
{
Console.WriteLine($"Comparing {x} with {y}");
return x.CompareTo(y);
}
}
(2) Modified the call to OrderByDescending() to pass a Comparer:
.OrderByDescending(g => g.Key, new Comparer())
(3) Multi-targeted my test console app to "net48" and "net5.0".
After making those changes the output was as follows:
For .net 4.8:
Comparing 1 with 3
Comparing 1 with 1
Comparing 1 with 2
Comparing 3 with 3
Comparing 3 with 2
Comparing 3 with 3
1, 6
For .net 5.0:
Comparing 3 with 1
Comparing 3 with 2
1, 6
As you can see, .net 5.0 is better optimised. For .net Framework however, (as /u/mjwills mentions below) it would likely be more performant to use a MaxBy() extension to avoid having to use OrderByDescending() - but only if instrumentation indicates that the sort is causing a performance issue.
If you want to do it in pure LINQ in one query you can group groups by count and select the max one:
int[] nums = new[] { 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7 };
var tops = nums
.GroupBy(i => i)
.GroupBy(grouping => grouping.Count())
.OrderByDescending(gr => gr.Key)
.Take(1)
.SelectMany(g => g.Select(g => g.Key))
.ToList();
Note that it is not a most effective and clear solution.
UPD
A little bit more effective version using Aggregate to perform MaxBy. Note that it will fail for empty collections unlike the previous one:
var tops = nums
.GroupBy(i => i)
.GroupBy(grouping => grouping.Count())
.Aggregate((max, curr) => curr.Key > max.Key ? curr : max)
.Select(gr => gr.Key);
Also you can use MaxBy from MoreLinq or one introduced in .NET 6.
You can store your result in an IEnumerable of tuples with the first item being the number, the second item being the count of the number in your input array. Then you look at the count of your group with most elements, and take all the tuples where the second items equals your maximum.
int[] nums = new[] { 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7 };
var intermediate = nums
.GroupBy(i => i)
.Select(g => (g.Key,g.Count()));
int amount = intermediate.Max(x => x.Item2);
IEnumerable<int> mostFrequent = intermediate
.Where(x => x.Item2 == amount)
.Select(x => x.Item1);
Online demo: https://dotnetfiddle.net/YCVGam
Use a variable to capture the number of items for the first item, then use TakeWhile to get all the groups with that number of items.
void Main()
{
var input = new[] { 1, 1, 1, 3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8 };
int numberOfItems = 0;
var output = input
.GroupBy(i => i)
.OrderByDescending(group => group.Count());
var maxNumberOfItems = output.FirstOrDefault()?.Count() ?? 0;
var finalOutput = output.TakeWhile(group => group.Count() == maxNumberOfItems).ToList();
foreach (var item in finalOutput)
{
Console.WriteLine($"Value {item.Key} has {item.Count()} members");
}
}
You can do this as a single query as well:
int? numberOfItems = null;
var finalOutput = input
.GroupBy(i => i)
.OrderByDescending(group => group.Count())
.TakeWhile(i =>
{
var count = i.Count();
numberOfItems ??= count;
return count == numberOfItems;
})
.ToList();
You could consider adding an extension-method. Something like
public static IEnumerable<T> TakeWhileEqual<T, T2>(this IEnumerable<T> collection, Func<T, T2> predicate)
where T2 : IEquatable<T2>
{
using var iter = collection.GetEnumerator();
if (iter.MoveNext())
{
var first = predicate(iter.Current);
yield return iter.Current;
while (iter.MoveNext() && predicate(iter.Current).Equals(first))
{
yield return iter.Current;
}
}
}
This has the advantage of being efficient, not needing to iterate over the collection more than once. But it does require some more code, even if this can be hidden in an extension method.
I think you probably want to use TakeWhile rather than Take;
int[] nums = new[] { 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7 };
var n = nums
.GroupBy(i => i)
.OrderByDescending(g => g.Count());
var c = n.First().Count();
var r = n.TakeWhile(g => g.Count() == c)
.Select(g => g.Key);
If you want to do this in a single pass, without LINQ, you can use a Dictionary and a List track
a) how many times you saw a value and
b) what value you saw the most times
c) what other most-values you saw that many times
We skip through the list, trying to look the current value up in the dictionary. It either works or it doesn't - if it works, TryGetValue tells us how many times the current value has been seen. IF it doesn't, TryGetValue gives use a seen of 0. We increment seen. We take a look at how it compares to the max we've seen so far:
It's greater - we have a new leader in the "most frequent" contest - clear the current leaders list and start over with the new n as the leader. Also note the new max
It's equal - we have a tie for the lead; add the current n in among its peers
It's less - we don't care
int[] nums = new[] { 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7 };
int maxSeen = int.MinValue;
var seens = new Dictionary<int, int>();
var maxes = new List<int>();
foreach(var n in nums){
seens.TryGetValue(n, out var seen);
seens[n] = ++seen;
if(seen > maxSeen){
maxes = new(){n};
maxSeen = seen;
} else if(seen == maxSeen)
maxes.Add(n);
}
You'll end up with maxes as a List<int> that is the list of numbers that appear most.
If you care about allocations of the List's internal array, you could consider clearing the list instead of newing; I new'd because it was a handy one liner to use an initializer with the new leader
You may first group the first input like that.
int[] input = { 1, 1, 1, 3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8 };
var tmpResult = from i in input
group i by i into k
select new
{
k.Key,
count = k.Count()
};
then you can filter the max value of group like that;
var max = tmpResult.Max(s => s.count);
after you should make a filter is enough
int[] result = tmpResult.Where(f => f.count == max).Select(s => s.Key).ToArray();
Also you can create an Extension method for this.
public static class Extension
{
public static int[] GetMostFrequent(this int[] input)
{
var tmpResult = from i in input
group i by i into k
select new
{
k.Key,
count = k.Count()
};
var max = tmpResult.Max(s => s.count);
return tmpResult.Where(f => f.count == max).Select(s => s.Key).ToArray();
}
You were very close. Just add one more line to your code.
int[] input = { 1, 1, 1, 3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8 };
var counts = input
.GroupBy(i => i)
.Select(i => new { Number = i.Key, Count = i.Count()})
.OrderByDescending(i => i.Count);
var maxCount = counts.First().Count;
var result = counts
.Where(i=> i.Count == maxCount)
.Select(i => i.Number);
result
{1,6}
I have to exclude items whose ids exist in another list.
List<Int64> Listofid;
var filteredlist = curProjArea.Project.ForEach(x => {x.ProjectId = (where
project id does not exist in Listofid) });
Is this possible?
You can filter projects in Where clause:
List<Int64> Listofid;
var filteredlist = curProjArea.Project.Where(x => !Listofid.Contains(x.ProjectId));
List<Int64> Listofid;
var filteredlist = curProjArea.Project.Where(x => !Listofid.Contains(x.ProjectId)).ToList();
Try this out once
int[] values1 = { 1, 2, 3, 4 };
// Contains three values (1 and 2 also found in values1).
int[] values2 = { 1, 2, 5 };
// Remove all values2 from values1.
var result = values1.Except(values2);
// Show.
foreach (var element in result)
{
Console.WriteLine(element);
}
From:
https://www.dotnetperls.com/except
I think , It's useful for you
List<Int64> Listofid = new List<Int64>() { 5, 3, 9, 7, 5, 9, 3, 7 };
List<Int64> filteredlist = new List<Int64>() { 8, 3, 6, 4, 4, 9, 1, 0 };
List<Int64> Except = filteredlist.Except(Listofid).ToList();
Console.WriteLine("Except Result");
foreach (int num in Except)
{
Console.WriteLine("{0} ", num); //Result = 8,6,4,1,0
}
Just negate the .Contains on the list for which you want to exclude it.
var filteredList = curProjArea.Project.Where(a => !Listofid.Contains(a.ProjectId));
Demo in Dotnet fiddle
I want to move specific number to the top of this list.
int numberToBeMovedOnTop = 4;
List<int> lst = new List<int>(){1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 4, 7, 9, 4, 2, 1};
List<int> lstOdd = lst.FindAll(l => l == numberToBeMovedOnTop);
lstOdd.AddRange(lst.FindAll(l => l != numberToBeMovedOnTop));
Where numberToBeMovedOnTop is a variable.
This gives me the desired result but is a better solution for this? I can iterate the list once and swap first occurence of numberToBeMovedOnTop with first element, second occurence with numberToBeMovedOnTop with second element and so on. But can this be done with some built-in C# function without iterating the list twice?
You could use LINQ:
List<int> lstOdd = lst.OrderByDescending(i => i == numberToBeMovedOnTop).ToList();
Why OrderByDescending? Because the comparison returns a bool and true is higher than false. You could also use:
List<int> lstOdd = lst.OrderBy(i => i == numberToBeMovedOnTop ? 0 : 1).ToList();
Note that this works because OrderBy and OrderByDescending are performing a stable sort. That means that the original order remains for all equal items.
For what it's worth, here is an extension method that works with any type and predicate and is a little bit more efficient:
public static List<T> PrependAll<T>(this List<T> list, Func<T, bool> predicate)
{
var returnList = new List<T>();
var listNonMatch = new List<T>();
foreach (T item in list)
{
if (predicate(item))
returnList.Add(item);
else
listNonMatch.Add(item);
}
returnList.AddRange(listNonMatch);
return returnList;
}
Usage: List<int> lstOdd = lst.PrependAll(i => i == numberToBeMovedOnTop);
Aside from using linq, it might be just as efficient/understandable to do this without linq
var listToAdd = new List<int>();
var listOdd = new List<int>();
for(int i = 0; i < lst.Count; i++)
{
if(lst[i] == numberToBeMovedOnTop)
{
listToAdd.Add(numberToBeMovedOnTop);
}
else
{
listOdd.Add(lst[i]);
}
}
listOdd.AddRange(listToAdd);
Keep track of those that you've removed, then add them on afterwards
Group by the predicate, then union?
var nums = new List<int> { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 };
var grp = nums.GroupBy(x => x % 2 == 0).ToList();
var changed = grp[0].Union(grp[1]).ToList();
This might be either impossible or so obvious I keep passing over it.
I have a list of objects(let's say ints for this example):
List<int> list = new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
I'd like to be able to group by pairs with no regard to order or any other comparison, returning a new IGrouping object.
ie,
list.GroupBy(i => someLogicToProductPairs);
There's the very real possibility I may be approaching this problem from the wrong angle, however, the goal is to group a set of objects by a constant capacity. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Do you mean like this:
List<int> list = new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 };
IEnumerable<IGrouping<int,int>> groups =
list
.Select((n, i) => new { Group = i / 2, Value = n })
.GroupBy(g => g.Group, g => g.Value);
foreach (IGrouping<int, int> group in groups) {
Console.WriteLine(String.Join(", ", group.Select(n=>n.ToString()).ToArray()));
}
Output
1, 2
3, 4
5, 6
you can do something like this...
List<int> integers = new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 };
var p = integers.Select((x, index) => new { Num = index / 2, Val = x })
.GroupBy(y => y.Num);
int counter = 0;
// this function returns the keys for our groups.
Func<int> keyGenerator =
() =>
{
int keyValue = counter / 2;
counter += 1;
return keyValue;
};
var groups = list.GroupBy(i => {return keyGenerator()});