We Keep Coding

How can I make so that my Values dont repeat with Random.Range()? [duplicate]

Basically I'm creating a program to randomly generate 6 unique lottery numbers so there is no duplicates in the same line, here is the code I have so far...
//Generate 6 random numbers using the randomiser object
int randomNumber1 = random.Next(1, 49);
int randomNumber2 = random.Next(1, 49);
int randomNumber3 = random.Next(1, 49);
int randomNumber4 = random.Next(1, 49);
int randomNumber5 = random.Next(1, 49);
int randomNumber6 = random.Next(1, 49);
textBox1.Text = randomNumber1.ToString();
textBox2.Text = randomNumber2.ToString();
textBox3.Text = randomNumber3.ToString();
textBox4.Text = randomNumber4.ToString();
textBox5.Text = randomNumber5.ToString();
textBox6.Text = randomNumber6.ToString();
}
I'm getting random numbers but sometimes there is the same number on the same line, how do I make each number unique????
Thanks in advance

You need to store them in a collection and each time you pick a new number you need to make sure it's not present already, otherwise you need to generate a new number until you find a unique number.
Instead of this, I would generate a sequence between 1 and 49, shuffle them and pick 6 number out of the sequence, for example:
var rnd = new Random();
var randomNumbers = Enumerable.Range(1,49).OrderBy(x => rnd.Next()).Take(6).ToList();

You can't. You've only specified that each number be a random number from 1 to 49, not that it shouldn't match any duplicates.
Since you've got a relatively small set of numbers, your best bet is probably to draw the random numbers, put them into a HashSet, then if you need more, pull more. Something like this:
HashSet<int> numbers = new HashSet<int>();
while (numbers.Count < 6) {
numbers.Add(random.Next(1, 49));
}
Here you're taking advantage of the HashSet's elimination of duplicates. This won't work with a List or other collection.

Returning repeat values is a necessity in order for a generator to satisfy a necessary statistical property of randomness: the probability of drawing a number is not dependent on the previous numbers drawn.
You could shuffle the integers in the range 1 to 49 and return the first 6 elements. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher%E2%80%93Yates_shuffle for more details on such a shuffler.
However, I think you get a slight statistical bias by doing this.
The best way is probably to use random.Next(1, 49); and reject any repeat. That will be free from statistical bias and the fact that you're only wanting 6 from 49 possibilities, the number of collisions will not slow the algorithm appreciably.

Using this extension method for reservoir sampling:
public static IList<T> TakeRandom<T>(
this IEnumerable<T> source, int count, Random random)
{
var list = new List<T>(count);
int n = 1;
foreach (var item in source)
{
if (list.Count < count)
{
list.Add(item);
}
else
{
int j = random.Next(n);
if (j < count)
{
list[j] = item;
}
}
n++;
}
return list;
}
You can sample your collection like this:
var random = new Random();
var numbers = Enumerable.Range(1, 49).TakeRandom(6, random);
numbers.Shuffle(random);
Note the returned numbers will be uniformly sampled out of all (49 choose 6) possibilities for a set of 6 numbers out of {1, 2, ..., 49}, but they will neither remain in order nor be uniformly shuffled. If you want to have the order randomized as well, you can easily do a standard Fisher-Yates shuffle afterwards.
public static void Shuffle<T>(this IList<T> list, Random random)
{
for (int i = 0; i < list.Count; i++)
{
int j = random.Next(i, list.Count);
T temp = list[j];
list[j] = list[i];
list[i] = temp;
}
}
Note a more heavily optimized version of Fisher-Yates shuffle can be found in this answer: Randomize a List<T>

List<int> aux = new List<int>();
while(aux.Count < 6)
{
int rnd = random.Next(1,49);
if(!aux.Contains(rnd))aux.add(rnd);
}
if you put all Texbox in the same panel you can do that
int j = 0;
foreach(Control x in MyPanel.Controls)
{
if(x is TexBox)
{
x.Text = aux[j].toString();
j++;
}
}

It's my solution: generate array of number
/// <summary>
/// auto generate a array with number element and max value is max
/// </summary>
/// <param name="number">number element of array</param>
/// <param name="max">max value of array</param>
/// <returns>array of number</returns>
public static int[] createRandomArray(int number, int max)
{
List<int> ValueNumber = new List<int>();
for (int i = 0; i < max; i++)
ValueNumber.Add(i);
int[] arr = new int[number];
int count = 0;
while (count < number)
{
Random rd = new Random();
int index = rd.Next(0,ValueNumber.Count -1);
int auto = ValueNumber[index];
arr[count] = auto;
ValueNumber.RemoveAt(index);
count += 1;
}
return arr;
}

It's too late but I use a Method named M_Randomizer created by me. It may look as too much work, but it's technique is different from traditional which is based on generating a random number and checking the previously generated list for uniqueness. This code while generating a new random number, never looks for the previously generated. And if we talk about touching all combinations, I have tested this method till 9 factorial, maybe little bias for some but it touches all.
using System;
class Randomizer
{
public int[] M_Randomizer(int x)
{
bool b = false;
if (x < -1)
{
b = true;
x = -1 * x;
}
if(x == -1)
x = 0;
if (x < 2)
return new int[x];
int[] site;
int k = new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next() % 2;
if (x == 2)
{
site = new int[2];
site[0] = k;
site[1] = 1 - site[0];
return site;
}
else if (x == 3)
{
site = new int[3];
site[0] = new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next(0, 3);
site[1] = (site[0] + k + 1) % 3;
site[2] = 3 - (site[0] + site[1]);
return site;
}
site = new int[x];
int a = 0, m = 0, n = 0, tmp = 0;
int[] p = M_Randomizer(3);
int[] q;
if (x % 3 == 0)
q = M_Randomizer(x / 3);
else
q = M_Randomizer((x / 3) + 1);
if (k == 0)
{
for (m = 0; m < q.Length; m++)
{
for (n = 0; n < p.Length && a < x; n++)
{
tmp = (q[m] * 3) + p[n];
if (tmp < x)
{
site[a] = tmp;
a++;
}
}
}
}
else
{
while (n < p.Length)
{
while (a < x)
{
tmp = (q[m] * 3) + p[n];
if (tmp < x)
{
site[a] = tmp;
a++;
}
m = m + k;
if (m >= q.Length)
break;
}
m = m % q.Length;
n++;
}
}
a = (new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next() % 2) + 1;
k = new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next() % 10;
if (k > 5)
for (int i = a; i < k; i++)
while (a < site.Length)
{
if (k % (a + 1) == 0)
{
tmp = site[a - 1];
site[a - 1] = site[a];
site[a] = tmp;
}
a = a + 2;
}
k = new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next() % 10;
if (k > 5)
{
n = x / 2;
k = 0;
if (x % 2 != 0)
k = (new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next() % 2);
p = new int[n + k];
m = (x - n) - k;
for (a = 0; m < x; a++, m++)
p[a] = site[m];
m = n + k;
for (a = (x - m) - 1; a >= 0; a--, m++)
site[m] = site[a];
for (a = 0; a < p.Length; a++)
site[a] = p[a];
}
int[] site2;
int[] site3 = new int[x];
if (b)
return site;
else
site2 = M_Randomizer(-1 * x);
for (a = 0; a < site.Length; a++)
site3[site2[a]] = site[a];
return site3;
}
public int[] M_Randomizer(int x, int start)
{
int[] dm = M_Randomizer(x);
for(int a = 0; a < x; a++)
dm[a] = dm[a] + start;
return dm;
}
}

Look at using an array to hold your 6 numbers.
Each time you generate one, loop through the array to make sure it is not already there. If it is, then generate another & loop again until you have a non-match.

It's so easy with array and OOP (Object Oriented Programming). Before you start you have to add Linq (using System.Linq) library to your project.
Random random = new Random();
int[] array = new int[6];
int number;
for (int i = 0; i < 6; i++)
{
number = random.Next(1, 50);
if (!array.Contains(number)) //If it's not contains, add number to array;
array[i] = number;
else //If it contains, restart random process
i--;
}
for (int i = 1; i < 7; i++)
{
foreach (Control c in this.Controls) //Add random numbers to all Textboxes
{
if (c is TextBox && c.Name.EndsWith(i.ToString()))
{
c.Text = array[i - 1].ToString();
}
}
}

A functional approach could be to generate an infinite sequence of random numbers, filter out non-unique numbers and take the number of unique numbers you need.
For example:
private IEnumerable<int> RandomDigitStream(int seed)
{
Random random = new Random(seed);
while (true)
{
yield return random.Next(DIGIT_MIN, DIGIT_MAX);
}
}
private List<int> GenerateUniqueRandomNumbers(int seed, int count)
{
// Assert that DIGIT_MAX - DIGIT_MIN > count to ensure
// algorithm can finish
return RandomDigitStream(seed)
.Distinct()
.Take(count)
.ToList();
}
The efficiency of this algorithm is mainly dependent on how Distinct is implemented by the .NET team. Its memory usage would grow with the number of digits you require and the range of digits produced by the random function. It also has an unpredictable running time as it depends on the probability distribution of the random function. In fact it is possible for this algorithm to get stuck in an infinite loop if the range of digits produced by the random algorithm is less than the number of digits you require.
Looking at it practically however, it should be fine for a small amount of digits but if you are looking at a large number (100 +) you might want to look at other methods.
It would be more efficient to craft a random algorithm that only produces unique numbers in the first place if that is even possible without using a lookup table.

Here is a small program using recursion to generate number lines, and also uses recursion to randomize and get unique numbers.
using System;
using System.Linq;
using System.Collections.Generic;
public class Program
{
public static Random random;
public static List<int> lottoNumbers = Enumerable.Range(1, 49).ToList();
public static void Main()
{
random = new Random((int)DateTime.Now.Ticks);
var LinesToGenerate = 10;
GenerateNumbers(LinesToGenerate);
}
public static void GenerateNumbers(int LineCount)
{
int[] SelectedNumbers = new int[6];
for (var i = 0; i < 6; i++)
{
var number = GetRandomNumber(lottoNumbers.ToArray());
while (SelectedNumbers.Contains(number))
number = GetRandomNumber(lottoNumbers.ToArray());
SelectedNumbers[i] = number;
}
var numbersOrdered = SelectedNumbers.OrderBy(n => n).Select(n => n.ToString().PadLeft(2, '0'));
Console.WriteLine(string.Join(" ", numbersOrdered));
if (LineCount > 1)
GenerateNumbers(--LineCount);
}
//Recursively and randomly removes numbers from the array until only one is left, and returns it
public static int GetRandomNumber(int[] arr)
{
if (arr.Length > 1)
{
//Remove random number from array
var r = random.Next(0, arr.Length);
var list = arr.ToList();
list.RemoveAt(r);
return GetRandomNumber(list.ToArray());
}
return arr[0];
}
}

Yes. Use array.
Loop how many times you want:
Generate a random number,
Loop through array and compare all with the generated number.
If there's a match then loop again till there's no match.
Then store it.
Done:)

Why is bubble sort running faster than selection sort?

I am working on a project that compares the time bubble and selection sort take. I made two separate programs and combined them into one and now bubble sort is running much faster than selection sort. I checked to make sure that the code wasn't just giving me 0s because of some conversion error and was running as intended. I am using System.Diagnostics; to measure the time. I also checked that the machine was not the problem, I ran it on Replit and got similar results.
{
class Program
{
public static int s1 = 0;
public static int s2 = 0;
static decimal bubblesort(int[] arr1)
{
int n = arr1.Length;
var sw1 = Stopwatch.StartNew();
for (int i = 0; i < n - 1; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < n - i - 1; j++)
{
if (arr1[j] > arr1[j + 1])
{
int tmp = arr1[j];
// swap tmp and arr[i] int tmp = arr[j];
arr1[j] = arr1[j + 1];
arr1[j + 1] = tmp;
s1++;
}
}
}
sw1.Stop();
// Console.WriteLine(sw1.ElapsedMilliseconds);
decimal a = Convert.ToDecimal(sw1.ElapsedMilliseconds);
return a;
}
static decimal selectionsort(int[] arr2)
{
int n = arr2.Length;
var sw1 = Stopwatch.StartNew();
// for (int e = 0; e < 1000; e++)
// {
for (int x = 0; x < arr2.Length - 1; x++)
{
int minPos = x;
for (int y = x + 1; y < arr2.Length; y++)
{
if (arr2[y] < arr2[minPos])
minPos = y;
}
if (x != minPos && minPos < arr2.Length)
{
int temp = arr2[minPos];
arr2[minPos] = arr2[x];
arr2[x] = temp;
s2++;
}
}
// }
sw1.Stop();
// Console.WriteLine(sw1.ElapsedMilliseconds);
decimal a = Convert.ToDecimal(sw1.ElapsedMilliseconds);
return a;
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Console.WriteLine("Enter the size of n");
int n = Convert.ToInt32(Console.ReadLine());
Random rnd = new System.Random();
decimal bs = 0M;
decimal ss = 0M;
int s = 0;
int[] arr1 = new int[n];
int tx = 1000; //tx is a variable that I can use to adjust sample size
decimal tm = Convert.ToDecimal(tx);
for (int i = 0; i < tx; i++)
{
for (int a = 0; a < n; a++)
{
arr1[a] = rnd.Next(0, 1000000);
}
ss += selectionsort(arr1);
bs += bubblesort(arr1);
}
bs = bs / tm;
ss = ss / tm;
Console.WriteLine("Bubble Sort took " + bs + " miliseconds");
Console.WriteLine("Selection Sort took " + ss + " miliseconds");
}
}
}
What is going on? What is causing bubble sort to be fast or what is slowing down Selection sort? How can I fix this?
I found that the problem was that the Selection Sort was looping 1000 times per method run in addition to the 1000 runs for sample size, causing the method to perform significantly worse than bubble sort. Thank you guys for help and thank you TheGeneral for showing me the benchmarking tools. Also, the array that was given as a parameter was a copy instead of a reference, as running through the loop manually showed me that the bubble sort was doing it's job and not sorting an already sorted array.

To solve your initial problem you just need to copy your arrays, you can do this easily with ToArray():
Creates an array from a IEnumerable.
ss += selectionsort(arr1.ToArray());
bs += bubblesort(arr1.ToArray());
However let's learn how to do a more reliable benchmark with BenchmarkDotNet:
BenchmarkDotNet Nuget
Official Documentation
Given
public class Sort
{
public static void BubbleSort(int[] arr1)
{
int n = arr1.Length;
for (int i = 0; i < n - 1; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < n - i - 1; j++)
{
if (arr1[j] > arr1[j + 1])
{
int tmp = arr1[j];
// swap tmp and arr[i] int tmp = arr[j];
arr1[j] = arr1[j + 1];
arr1[j + 1] = tmp;
}
}
}
}
public static void SelectionSort(int[] arr2)
{
int n = arr2.Length;
for (int x = 0; x < arr2.Length - 1; x++)
{
int minPos = x;
for (int y = x + 1; y < arr2.Length; y++)
{
if (arr2[y] < arr2[minPos])
minPos = y;
}
if (x != minPos && minPos < arr2.Length)
{
int temp = arr2[minPos];
arr2[minPos] = arr2[x];
arr2[x] = temp;
}
}
}
}
Benchmark code
[SimpleJob(RuntimeMoniker.Net50)]
[MemoryDiagnoser()]
public class SortBenchmark
{
private int[] data;
[Params(100, 1000)]
public int N;
[GlobalSetup]
public void Setup()
{
var r = new Random(42);
data = Enumerable
.Repeat(0, N)
.Select(i => r.Next(0, N))
.ToArray();
}
[Benchmark]
public void Bubble() => Sort.BubbleSort(data.ToArray());
[Benchmark]
public void Selection() => Sort.SelectionSort(data.ToArray());
}
Usage
static void Main(string[] args)
{
BenchmarkRunner.Run<SortBenchmark>();
}
Results
Method
N
Mean
Error
StdDev
Bubble
100
8.553 us
0.0753 us
0.0704 us
Selection
100
4.757 us
0.0247 us
0.0231 us
Bubble
1000
657.760 us
7.2581 us
6.7893 us
Selection
1000
300.395 us
2.3302 us
2.1796 us
Summary
What have we learnt? Your bubble sort code is slower ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It looks like you're passing in the sorted array into Bubble Sort. Because arrays are passed by reference, the sort that you're doing on the array is editing the same contents of the array that will be eventually passed into bubble sort.
Make a second array and pass the second array into bubble sort.

How do I get rid of circular numbers in my list

Okay, I know that this code is crude, and all around a messy, but I am no programmer, so bear with me. I have this code that lists a bunch of numbers, but I want it to not list any circular copies of the numbers.
For example, if the number 111262 is on my list, I don't want 112621, 126211, 262111, 621112, or 211126 to be listed.
Sorry, that number cannot be on the list.
For a true example, if the number 111252 is on my list, I don't want 112521, 125211, 252111, 521112, or 211125 to be listed.
Any help is appreciated!
namespace Toric_Classes
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int number_of_perms=0;
bool badsubsum1;
bool badsubsum2;
int subsum1 = 0;
int subsum2 = 0;
int sum = 0;
int class_length=6;
int[] toric_class=new int[class_length];
// The nested for loops scroll through every possible number of length class_length, where each digit can have a value of 1,2,..., or class_length-1
// Each number is looked at as an array, and is not stored anywhere, only printed if it satisfies certain conditions
for(int i1=1; i1<class_length; i1++)
{
toric_class[0] = i1;
for (int i2 = 1; i2 < class_length; i2++)
{
toric_class[1] = i2;
for (int i3 = 1; i3 < class_length; i3++)
{
toric_class[2] = i3;
for (int i4 = 1; i4 < class_length; i4++)
{
toric_class[3] = i4;
for (int i5 = 1; i5 < class_length; i5++)
{
toric_class[4] = i5;
for (int i6 = 1; i6 < class_length; i6++)
{
badsubsum1 = false;
badsubsum2 = false;
toric_class[5] = i6;
// Find the value of the sum of the digits of our array.
// We only want numbers that have a total digit sum being a multiple of class_length
for (int k = 0; k < class_length; k++)
{
sum += toric_class[k];
}
// The follwong two nested loops find the value of every contiguous subsum of our number, but not the total subsum.
// We *do not* want any subsum to be a multiple of class_length.
// That is, if our number is, say, 121342, we want to find 1+2, 1+2+1, 1+2+1+3, 1+2+1+3+4, 2+1, 2+1+3, 2+1+3+4, 2+1+3+4+2, 1+3, 1+3+4, 1+3+4+2, 3+4, 3+4+2, and 4+2
// The following checks 1+2, 1+2+1, 1+2+1+3, 1+2+1+3+4, 2+1, 2+1+3, 2+1+3+4, 1+3, 1+3+4, and 3+4
for (int i = 0; i < class_length - 1; i++)
{
for (int j = i + 1; j < class_length - 1; j++)
{
for (int k = i; k < j; k++)
{
subsum1 += toric_class[k];
}
if (subsum1 % class_length == 0)
{
badsubsum1 = true;
break;
}
subsum1 = 0;
}
}
// The following checks 2+1, 2+1+3, 2+1+3+4, 2+1+3+4+2, 1+3, 1+3+4, 1+3+4+2, 3+4, 3+4+2, and 4+2
for (int i = 1; i < class_length; i++)
{
for (int j = i + 1; j < class_length; j++)
{
for (int k = i; k < j; k++)
{
subsum2 += toric_class[k];
}
if (subsum2 % class_length == 0)
{
badsubsum2 = true;
break;
}
subsum2 = 0;
}
}
// We only want numbers that satisfies the following conditions
if (sum % class_length == 0 && badsubsum1 == false && badsubsum2 == false)
{
foreach (var item in toric_class)
{
Console.Write(item.ToString());
}
Console.Write(Environment.NewLine);
number_of_perms++;
}
sum = 0;
subsum1 = 0;
subsum2 = 0;
}
}
}
}
}
}
Console.WriteLine("Number of Permuatations: "+number_of_perms);
Console.Read();
}
}
}
EDIT
To clarify, I am creating a list of all numbers with length n that satisfy certain conditions. Consider the number d1d2...dn, where each di is a digit of our number. Each di may have value 1,2,...,n. Our number is in the list if it satisfies the following
The sum of all the digits is a multiple of n, that is,
d1+d2+...+dn = 0 mod n
Every contiguous subsum of the digits is not a multiple of n, aside from the total sum, that is, if i !=1 and j != n, then
di+d(i+1)+...+dj != 0 mod n
I should mention again that a "number" does not strictly use the numbers 0-9 in its digits. It may take any value between 1 and n. In my code, I am using the case where n=6.
The code works by creating an array of length class_length (in the code above, I use class_length=6). We first have 6 nested for loops that simply assign values to the array toric_class. The first for assigns toric_class[0], the second for assigns toric_class[1], and so on. In the first go around, we are generating the array 111111, then 111112, up to 111115, then 111121, etc. So essentially, we are looking at all heximal numbers that do not include 0. Once we reach our sixth value in our array, we check the array toric_class and check its values to ensure that it satisfies the above conditions. If it does, we simply print the array in a line, and move on.

Here is my easy and inefficient way that should work with minimal changes to your code. It requires shared string list var strList = new List<string>(); to store the used numbers. Then this part:
foreach (var item in toric_class)
{
Console.Write(item.ToString());
}
Console.Write(Environment.NewLine);
number_of_perms++;
becomes something like this:
string strItem = " " + string.Join(" ", toric_class) + " "; // Example: int[] {1, 12, 123} becomes " 1 12 123 "
if (!strList.Any(str => str.Contains(strItem))) // Example: if " 1 12 123 1 12 123 " contains " 1 12 123 "
{
Console.WriteLine(strItem);
strItem += strItem.Substring(1); // double the string, but keep only one space between them
strList.Add(strItem);
}
number_of_perms++; // not sure if this should be in the if statement
The idea is that for example the string " 1 1 1 2 5 2 1 1 1 2 5 2 " contains all circular copies of the numbers {1, 1, 1, 2, 5, 2}. I used string as a lazy way to check if array contains sub-array, but you can use similar approach to store copy of the used numbers in a list of arrays new List<int[]>() and check if any of the arrays in the list is circular copy of the current array, or even better HashSet<int[]>() approach similar to #slavanap's answer.
The first version of my answer was the easiest, but it works only with array of single digit items.
List is almost the same as array (new List<string>() instead of new string[]), but makes it much easier and efficient to add items to it. For example {1,2}.Add(3) becomes {1,2,3}.
str => str.Contains(strItem) is shortcut for a function that accepts parameter str and returns the result of str.Contains(strItem). That "function" is then passed to the .Any LINQ extension, so
strList.Any(str => str.Contains(strItem))
is shortcut for something like this:
foreach(string str in strList)
{
if (str.Contains(strItem))
{
return true;
}
}
return false;

The following method:
private static List<int> GetCircularEquivalents(int value)
{
var circularList = new List<int>();
var valueString = value.ToString();
var length = valueString.Length - 1;
for (var i = 0; i < length; i++)
{
valueString = valueString.Substring(1, length) + valueString.Substring(0, 1);
circularList.Add(int.Parse(valueString));
}
return circularList;
}
will return a list of the circular numbers derived from the input value. Using your example, this method can be called like this:
var circularList = GetCircularEquivalents(111262);
var dirtyList = new List<int> { 1, 112621, 2, 126211, 3, 262111, 4, 621112, 5, 211126, 6 };
var cleanList = dirtyList.Except(circularList).ToList();
which would result in a cleanList made up of the numbers 1 through 6, i.e. the dirtyList with all the circular numbers derived from 111262 removed.

That's where OOP really benefits. Comments inlined.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace ConsoleApplication3 {
struct MyInt : IEquatable<MyInt> {
private int _value;
public MyInt(int value) {
_value = value;
}
// make it look like int
static public implicit operator MyInt(int value) {
return new MyInt(value);
}
public static explicit operator int(MyInt instance) {
return instance._value;
}
// main difference in these 3 methods
private int GetDigitsNum() {
int temp, res;
for (res = 0, temp = Math.Abs(_value); temp > 0; ++res, temp /= 10);
return res;
}
public bool Equals(MyInt other) {
int digits = other.GetDigitsNum();
if (digits != this.GetDigitsNum())
return false;
int temp = other._value;
// prepare mul used in shifts
int mul = 1;
for (int i = 0; i < digits - 1; ++i)
mul *= 10;
// compare
for (int i = 0; i < digits; ++i) {
if (temp == _value)
return true;
// ROR
int t = temp % 10;
temp = temp / 10 + t * mul;
}
return false;
}
public override int GetHashCode() {
// hash code must be equal for "equal" items,
// that's why use a sum of digits.
int sum = 0;
for (int temp = _value; temp > 0; temp /= 10)
sum += temp % 10;
return sum;
}
// be consistent
public override bool Equals(object obj) {
return (obj is MyInt) ? Equals((MyInt)obj) : false;
}
public override string ToString() {
return _value.ToString();
}
}
class Program {
static void Main(string[] args) {
List<MyInt> list = new List<MyInt> { 112621, 126211, 262111, 621112, 211126 };
// make a set of unique items from list
HashSet<MyInt> set = new HashSet<MyInt>(list);
// print that set
foreach(int item in set)
Console.WriteLine(item);
}
}
}
Output:
112621

Reorder digits in integer using C#

I want to ask how I can reorder the digits in an Int32 so they result in the biggest possible number.
Here is an example which visualizes what I am trying to do:
2927466 -> 9766422
12492771 -> 97742211
I want to perform the ordering of the digits without using the System.Linq namespace and without converting the integer into a string value.
This is what I got so far:
public static int ReorderInt32Digits(int v)
{
int n = Math.Abs(v);
int l = ((int)Math.Log10(n > 0 ? n : 1)) + 1;
int[] d = new int[l];
for (int i = 0; i < l; i++)
{
d[(l - i) - 1] = n % 10;
n /= 10;
}
if (v < 0)
d[0] *= -1;
Array.Sort(d);
Array.Reverse(d);
int h = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < d.Length; i++)
{
int index = d.Length - i - 1;
h += ((int)Math.Pow(10, index)) * d[i];
}
return h;
}
This algorithm works flawlessly but I think it is not very efficient.
I would like to know if there is a way to do the same thing more efficiently and how I could improve my algorithm.

You can use this code:
var digit = 2927466;
String.Join("", digit.ToString().ToCharArray().OrderBy(x => x));
Or
var res = String.Join("", digit.ToString().ToCharArray().OrderByDescending(x => x) );

Not that my answer may or may not be more "efficient", but when I read your code you calculated how many digits there are in your number so you can determine how large to make your array, and then you calculated how to turn your array back into a sorted integer.
It would seem to me that you would want to write your own code that did the sorting part without using built in functionality, which is what my sample does. Plus, I've added the ability to sort in ascending or descending order, which is easy to add in your code too.
UPDATED
The original algorithm sorted the digits, now it sorts the digits so that the end result is the largest or smallest depending on the second parameter passed in. However, when dealing with a negative number the second parameter is treated as opposite.
using System;
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
int number1 = 2927466;
int number2 = 12492771;
int number3 = -39284925;
Console.WriteLine(OrderDigits(number1, false));
Console.WriteLine(OrderDigits(number2, true));
Console.WriteLine(OrderDigits(number3, false));
}
private static int OrderDigits(int number, bool asc)
{
// Extract each digit into an array
int[] digits = new int[(int)Math.Floor(Math.Log10(Math.Abs(number)) + 1)];
for (int i = 0; i < digits.Length; i++)
{
digits[i] = number % 10;
number /= 10;
}
// Order the digits
for (int i = 0; i < digits.Length; i++)
{
for (int j = i + 1; j < digits.Length; j++)
{
if ((!asc && digits[j] > digits[i]) ||
(asc && digits[j] < digits[i]))
{
int temp = digits[i];
digits[i] = digits[j];
digits[j] = temp;
}
}
}
// Turn the array of digits back into an integer
int result = 0;
for (int i = digits.Length - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
result += digits[i] * (int)Math.Pow(10, digits.Length - 1 - i);
}
return result;
}
}
Results:
9766422
11224779
-22345899
See working example here... https://dotnetfiddle.net/RWA4XV

public static int ReorderInt32Digits(int v)
{
var nums = Math.Abs(v).ToString().ToCharArray();
Array.Sort(nums);
bool neg = (v < 0);
if(!neg)
{
Array.Reverse(nums);
}
return int.Parse(new string(nums)) * (neg ? -1 : 1);
}

This code fragment below extracts the digits from variable v. You can modify it to store the digits in an array and sort/reverse.
int v = 2345;
while (v > 0) {
int digit = v % 10;
v = v / 10;
Console.WriteLine(digit);
}
You can use similar logic to reconstruct the number from (sorted) digits: Multiply by 10 and add next digit.

I'm posting this second answer because I think I got the most efficient algorithm of all (thanks for the help Atul) :)
void Main()
{
Console.WriteLine (ReorderInt32Digits2(2927466));
Console.WriteLine (ReorderInt32Digits2(12492771));
Console.WriteLine (ReorderInt32Digits2(-1024));
}
public static int ReorderInt32Digits2(int v)
{
bool neg = (v < 0);
int mult = neg ? -1 : 1;
int result = 0;
var counts = GetDigitCounts(v);
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
int idx = neg ? 9 - i : i;
for (int j = 0; j < counts[idx]; j++)
{
result += idx * mult;
mult *= 10;
}
}
return result;
}
// From Atul Sikaria's answer
public static int[] GetDigitCounts(int n)
{
int v = Math.Abs(n);
var result = new int[10];
while (v > 0) {
int digit = v % 10;
v = v / 10;
result[digit]++;
}
return result;
}

Generic initialization of multidimensional array

I have a multidimensional array, which I want to initialize in a simple and fast way:
double[,,] arr = new double[4,5,6];
// doesn't work by design
foreach(double d in arr)
d = ... ; // my initialization value
This obviously doesn't works. But I would like to have a generic function for setting all array values to a choosen default. With own classes, I could write a special constructor, but with value types I've no real idea. With C++, I could access all items in a linear way with one for loop, but in C# I think I've to use as much for loops as I have dimensions. I've no better solution at the moment ( or I'm using unsafe code and pointer arithmetics, which would probably work.).
Is there a more elegant way for doing this ?

Not quite sure if it's what you want, but the following extension method will allow you to initialise every value in an array, regardless of the number of dimensions.
public static class ArrayExtensions
{
public static void Set<T>(this Array array, T defaultValue)
{
int[] indicies = new int[array.Rank];
SetDimension<T>(array, indicies, 0, defaultValue);
}
private static void SetDimension<T>(Array array, int[] indicies, int dimension, T defaultValue)
{
for (int i = 0; i <= array.GetUpperBound(dimension); i++)
{
indicies[dimension] = i;
if (dimension < array.Rank - 1)
SetDimension<T>(array, indicies, dimension + 1, defaultValue);
else
array.SetValue(defaultValue, indicies);
}
}
}
Use like so:
int[, ,] test1 = new int[3, 4, 5];
test1.Set(1);
int[,] test2 = new int[3, 4];
test2.Set(1);
int[] test3 = new int[3];
test3.Set(1);

I would strongly recommend using a 1D array, and map the values sequentially. You will need to convert from indeces i, j, k, ... into the proper array index, which is done with the Que() function below, part of a generic array class SeqArray<T>.
// Test code first
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
/* 3 pages, of a 4x2 matrix
*
* |16 17|
* | 8 9|19|
* | 0 1|11|21|
* | 2 3|13|23|
* | 4 5|15|
* | 6 7|
*
* shown above are the sequential indeces for a rank 3 array
*/
SeqArray<double> arr = new SeqArray<double>(3, 4, 2);
// Initialize values to squential index "num"
int num = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < 4; j++)
{
for (int k = 0; k < 2; k++)
{
arr[i, j, k] = num++;
}
}
}
// Check that the array values correspond to the index sequence
num = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < 3 * 4 * 2; i++)
{
Trace.Assert(arr.InnerArray[i] == num++);
}
// Initialize with value=π
arr = new SeqArray<double>(Math.PI, 4, 5, 6);
}
}
public class SeqArray<T>
{
T[] values;
int[] lengths;
public SeqArray(params int[] lengths)
{
this.lengths = lengths;
int N = 1;
for (int i = 0; i < lengths.Length; i++)
{
N *= lengths[i];
}
values = new T[N];
}
public SeqArray(T value, params int[] lengths) : this(lengths)
{
for (int i = 0; i < values.Length; i++)
{
values[i] = value;
}
}
public int[] Lengths { get { return lengths; } }
public int Size { get { return values.Length; } }
internal T[] InnerArray { get { return values; } }
public int Que(params int[] indeces)
{
// Check if indeces are omited like arr[4] instead of arr[4,0,0]
if (indeces.Length < lengths.Length)
{
// Make a new index array padded with zeros
int[] temp = new int[lengths.Length];
indeces.CopyTo(temp, 0);
indeces = temp;
}
// Count the elements for indeces
int k = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < indeces.Length; i++)
{
k = lengths[i] * k + indeces[i];
}
return k;
}
public T this[params int[] indeces]
{
get { return values[Que(indeces)]; }
set { values[Que(indeces)] = value; }
}
}

Here is a non-recursive version alternative to that posted by Andy Holt above:
public static void SetAll<T>(this Array array, T value)
{
var sizes = new int[array.Rank];
sizes[array.Rank - 1] = 1;
for (var d = array.Rank - 2; d >= 0; d--)
{
sizes[d] = array.GetLength(d + 1)*sizes[d + 1];
}
for (var i = 0; i < array.Length; i++)
{
var remainder = i;
var index = new int[array.Rank];
for (var d = 0; d < array.Rank && remainder > 0; d++)
{
index[d] = remainder / sizes[d];
remainder -= index[d]*sizes[d];
}
array.SetValue(value, index);
}
}