We Keep Coding

For Loop that counts up and down from a start index inside range

I'm having trouble developing a for-loop that starts at a given integer (start) and then counts up and down from this starting point inside a given range (min to max). I want the result to be in order by distance to the given start. If a for-loop is not the right tool here, i am open for other suggestions!
Since this is hard to explain i have a example down below:
var start = 4;
var max = 10;
var min = 0;
var stepSize = 1;
for(var i=startIndex; i>=min && i<=max; ???) {
Console.WriteLine(i)
}
The result should look like this:
4 5 3 6 2 7 1 8 0 9 10
The really tricky part for me is the end where the alternation has to stop in order to reach the max value of 10 and not go below 0 in the meantime.
I started experimenting and had a solution that would work for the first bit:
const int start = 4;
const int stepSize = 1;
for (var (i,j,k) = (start,1,5); Math.Abs(j)<=11; k=(k+j),j=-j-Math.Sign(j)*stepSize,i=(k+(start-5))%11) {
Console.WriteLine(i);
}
This works fine for the first part where alternation is needed, but it breaks once the alternation needs to stop. The result from this experiment is:
4 5 3 6 2 7 1 8 0 9 -1

Here it is with a for loop, but like others have already alluded to, I think other structures are better suited for your task:
public static void Main() {
int start = 4;
int max = 10;
int min = 0;
int stepSize = 1;
for(int i=start, j=start; i>=min || j<=max; i-=stepSize, j+=stepSize) {
if (i==start) {
Console.Write(i + " ");
}
else {
if (j <= max) {
Console.Write(j + " ");
}
if (i >= min) {
Console.Write(i + " ");
}
}
}
}

The sequence you are after:
4 5 3 6 2 7 1 8 0 9 10
Could be specified as the following:
4 - 3 - 2 - 1 - 0
- 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 10
- - - - - - - - - - --
4 5 3 6 2 7 1 8 0 9 10
Which using something like MoreLinq, could be expressed like this:
Sequence(4, 0).Interleave(Sequence(5, 10))
Obviously, you control the start, max and min by controlling the values of both sequences. So, say you want to start from 7, going up and down towards 1 as the minimum value, and 14 as the maximum. The call would be like:
Sequence(7, 1).Interleave(Sequence(8, 14))
Lastly, this also allows you to easily change from a "up-down" to a "down-up" by swapping the intervals. Using the example above:
Sequence(8, 14).Interleave(Sequence(7, 1))
Note that Sequence also has an overload that takes a step argument, so you can additionally expand the examples below with arbitrary step increments and not only 1.

Since you explicitly stated that you want a for loop that produces the pattern, how about this approach:
Find the larger "distance" first and let the loop run until this point, not starting with 0. In the loop check in both directions and do the calculations inline and call the method once beforehand with the original value.
int x = 4;
int min = 0;
int max = 10;
int largest = Math.Max(Math.Abs(min - x), Math.Abs(max - x));
YourMethod(x);
for (int i = 1; i <= largest; i++)
{
if (x + i <= max)
YourMethod(x + i);
if (x - i >= min)
YourMethod(x - i);
}

A simple but elegant solution could generate the number sequence you want like so:
static IEnumerable<int>
UpDownCount(int start, int lower, int upper)
{
int i = start, j = start;
yield return start;
while (true)
{
bool ilimit = ++i <= upper,
jlimit = --j >= lower;
if (ilimit)
yield return i;
if (jlimit)
yield return j;
if (!(ilimit || jlimit))
yield break;
}
}
Then you can use that sequence with LINQ or a simple foreach loop:
foreach (int i in UpDownCount(4, 0, 10))
Console.WriteLine(i);

Algorithm to get which values make sum of a given number from array

I don't know to search or google it so I ask it here.
I have an array of integers with fixed size and exactly with this logic.
sample [1,2,4,8,16,32]
Now I am given a number for example 26. And I shall find the numbers whose sum will make this number, in this case is [2,8,16]
for a number of 20 it will be [4,16]
for 40 it is [8,32]
and for 63 it is all of these numbers [1,2,4,8,16,32]
What is the proper algorithm for that?
I know strictly that there is always this continuation that the number is double of the previous value.
as well as only the numbers from the given array will sum up to the given number and each number will be used only for once or none
If it will be in C# method that takes array of ints and an int value and returns the array of ints that contains the ints that sum up this number from the given array will be preferred.
Thank you

As you can see, the number are base-2, which means you can easily use shift.
You could try this:
private IEnumerable<int> FindBits(int value)
{
// check for bits.
for (int i = 0; i < 32; i++)
{
// shift 1 by i
var bitVal = 1 << i; // you could use (int)Math.Pow(2, i); instead
// check if the value contains that bit.
if ((value & bitVal) == bitVal)
// yep, it did.
yield return bitVal;
}
}
This method will check what bits are set and return them as an ienumerable. (which can be converted to an array of list)
Usage:
// find the bits.
var res = FindBits(40).ToArray();
// format it using the string.join
var str = $"[{string.Join(",", res)}]";
// present the results
Console.WriteLine(str);
Results in [8,32]
Extra info:
counter
00000001 = 1 = 1 << 0
00000010 = 2 = 1 << 1
00000100 = 4 = 1 << 2
00001000 = 8 = 1 << 3
00010000 = 16 = 1 << 4
00100000 = 32 = 1 << 5
01000000 = 64 = 1 << 6
10000000 = 128 = 1 << 7
Instead of writing all combinations you make a for loop which does the counter.
Some extra non-sense:
If you like lambda's, you could replace the FindBits with this:
private Func<int, IEnumerable<int>> FindBits = (int value) => Enumerable
.Range(0, 31)
.Select(i => 2 << i).Where(i => (value & i) == i);
But it's better to keep it simpel/readable.

First you should notice that
( 1 2 4 8 16 ... ) = (2^0 2^1 2^2 2^3 2^4 ... )
And that this is the same as finding a binary encoding for a decimal number. What you are looking for is an algorithm to transform a decimal or base 10 number to a binary or base 2 number.
The algorithm is pretty simple:
public List<int> dec_to_bin(int num)
{
List<int> return_list = new List<int>();
int index = 0;
int remainder = num;
int bit = 0;
while (remainder > 0)
{
bit = remainder % 2;
if (bit == 1 )
{
return_list.Add((int)Math.Pow(2, index));
}
remainder = remainder / 2;
index = index + 1;
}
return return_list;
}
There is a better way however that just uses the underlying encoding of the number which is already binary.
public List<int> dec_to_bin(int num)
{
List<int> return_list = new List<int>();
int value = 1;
while( value < num )
{
if( (value & num) == value )
{
return_list.Add(value);
}
value = value * 2;
}
return return_list;
}

Another way to state your requirement is "What are the unique powers of 2 that sum to a given integer?" Since computers work with powers of 2 natively, there are built-in goodies in most languages to do this very succinctly.
As a bonus, you can use existing .Net types and methods to eliminate the need to write your own loops.
Here's one approach:
IEnumerable<int> GetCompositePowersOf2(int input) =>
//convert to enumerable of bools, one for each bit in the
//input value (true=1, false=0)
new BitArray(new[] { input }).Cast<bool>()
// get power of 2 corresponding to the position in the enumerable
// for each true value, gets 0 for false values.
.Select((isOne, pos) => isOne ? (1 << pos) : 0)
//filter out the 0 values
.Where(pow => pow > 0);

I don't quite get the " takes array of ints " part, since this creation of sums only works with numbers that are the power of 2.
private int[] count (int num)
{
int factor = 0;
List<int> facts = new List<int>();
while (num > 0)
{
int counter = 0;
int div = num;
int remainder = 0;
while (remainder == 0)
{
remainder = div % 2;
div = div / 2;
counter++;
}
factor = 1;
for (int i = 1; i < counter; i++)
factor *= 2;
num = num - factor;
facts.Add(factor);
}
return (facts.ToArray());
}

c# Hackerrank code terminated due to time out but there is no way to optimize this code further?

I was doing a hacker rank challenge in c# to try and bring some of my c skills over to c#. Now I know hacker rank is notoriously stupid with killing programs due to time out (in this case if it lasts more than 3 seconds). But I honestly cannot think of a way to optimize this code further.
Here are the instructions:
https://www.hackerrank.com/challenges/ctci-array-left-rotation
Basically the challenge is to shift an array of numbers some x amount of times over in the left direction inside the array.
To my knowledge this code is as minimal as it can get and still do the thing they requested. The only way I can think to optimize this code further is to merge the constraint "if(a[i] > 1000000 || a[i] < 1 )" with the writeline forloop at the end of the code, but I tried that and it didn't work.
To me this is literally the minimum number of operations to move the array over by an amount x. But the code fails in test case 7 and 8 (out of 8) due to time out. Am I missing something?
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.IO;
using System.Linq;
class Solution
{
static void Main(String[] args)
{
int i, j;
int temp = 0;
string[] tokens_n = Console.ReadLine().Split(' ');
int n = Convert.ToInt32(tokens_n[0]);
int k = Convert.ToInt32(tokens_n[1]);
string[] a_temp = Console.ReadLine().Split(' ');
int[] a = Array.ConvertAll(a_temp,Int32.Parse);
//constraints
if(n >= 100000 || n < 1 )
{
System.Environment.Exit(1);
}
if(k > n || n < 1 )
{
System.Environment.Exit(1);
}
for(i = 0; i< n; i++)
{
if(a[i] > 1000000 || a[i] < 1 )
{
System.Environment.Exit(1);
}
}
//double for loop. one adjust position by one. then repeat k number of times.
for(j = 0; j<k; j++)
{
for(i = 0; i< n-1; i++)
{
temp = a[i];
a[i] = a[i+1];
a[i+1] = temp;
}
}
//view array
for(i = 0; i< n; i++)
{
Console.Write(a[i] + " " );
}
}
}

I used a queue mechanism to get this working. That way you don't have to do any array copy and just rotating the string to the end.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.IO;
using System.Linq;
class Solution {
static int[] leftRotation(int[] arr, int rotation) {
Queue<int> queue = new Queue<int>(arr);
for (int i = 0; i < rotation; i++)
{
queue.Enqueue(queue.Dequeue());
}
return queue.ToArray();
}
static void Main(String[] args) {
string[] tokens_n = Console.ReadLine().Split(' ');
int n = Convert.ToInt32(tokens_n[0]);
int d = Convert.ToInt32(tokens_n[1]);
string[] a_temp = Console.ReadLine().Split(' ');
int[] a = Array.ConvertAll(a_temp,Int32.Parse);
int[] result = leftRotation(a, d);
Console.WriteLine(String.Join(" ", result));
}
}

Shuffling the values one at a time is very slow. There is no need to do this. One can think of the rotation as moving 2 blocks - the values to the left of the rotation point and the values including and to the right of the rotation point
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Rotate this 3 times is
move 1-3 to a temp variable
move 4-9 to the start of the array
move 1-3 to the end of 4-9
Edit: Add a bit more detail
We want to rotate the array 3 places.
move 1 2 3 to a temporary array
1 2 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
move 4-9 to the start of the array
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 7 8 9
move 1-3 to the end of the array
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3
We can get away without the temp array for the left hand block if we create a new target array and copy everything to it. The following passes all the tests for the problem
var result = new int[a.Length];
var block2Length = a.Length - k;
Array.Copy(a, k, result, 0, block2Length);
Array.Copy(a, 0, result, block2Length, k);
Console.WriteLine(string.Join(" ", result.Select(v => v.ToString())));
Other Points
The constraints in HackerRank are part of the problem definition - they are telling us what the values can/will do so that we don't have to worry about solving a more general problem
e.g.
1 <= a[i] < 10^6
tells us the numbers will all be within the range for standard integers, no need to use long or BigInteger. As part of the solution we don't need to confirm these. In a real world situation different rules apply but here we have as much code checking values that cannot be wrong as we have solving the problem.

This has already been answered but there is a different solution that is very fast:
The idea is that you use the periodicity of the shifting. Shifting an element n+1 times is the same as shifting it 1 time which boils down to k % n.
Thus, you can simply create a new array and move the "old" elements directly to the correct spot. See the sample code below:
static void Main(String[] args) {
string[] tokens_n = Console.ReadLine().Split(' ');
int n = Convert.ToInt32(tokens_n[0]);
int k = Convert.ToInt32(tokens_n[1]);
string[] a_temp = Console.ReadLine().Split(' ');
int[] a = Array.ConvertAll(a_temp,Int32.Parse);
// use the periodicity of the shifting creating a shift between 0 and n - 1.
int shifts = k % n;
// Create a new array to hold the elements at their new positions.
int[] newPositions = new int[a.Length];
// You only need to iterate of the array once assigning each element its new position.
for(int i= 0; i < a.Length; ++i)
{
// Here is the magic: (for clarification see table below)
int position = (i - shifts + n)%n;
newPositions[position] = a[i];
}
foreach(var element in newPositions)
Console.Write($"{element} ");
}
This is more intuitive once you write it down on paper. The table might prints more values than the array contains to show the actual positions in the array.
-4 -3 -2 -1 | 0 1 2 3 4 (array indices)
=============================
2 3 4 5 | 1 2 3 4 5 (array contents without shift)
3 4 5 1 | 2 3 4 5 1 (shifted 1 time)
4 5 1 2 | 3 4 5 1 2 (shifted 2 times)
5 1 2 3 | 4 5 1 2 3 (shifted 3 times)
1 2 3 4 | 5 1 2 3 4 (shifted 4 times)
formula: i - k + n
results:
i=0: 0 - 4 + 5 = 1
i=1: 1 - 4 + 5 = 2
i=2: 2 - 4 + 5 = 3
i=3: 3 - 4 + 5 = 4
i=4: 4 - 4 + 5 = 5
i=5: 5 - 4 + 5 = 6 => 0
EDIT: I skipped the parts to check the boundaries for the sake of simplicity.

Updated answer.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.IO;
using System.Linq;
class Solution
{
static void Main(String[] args)
{
int i, j, z;
string[] tokens_n = Console.ReadLine().Split(' ');
int n = Convert.ToInt32(tokens_n[0]);
int k = Convert.ToInt32(tokens_n[1]);
string[] a_temp = Console.ReadLine().Split(' ');
int[] a = Array.ConvertAll(a_temp,Int32.Parse);
int[] temparray = new int[2*n];
//constraints
if(n >= 100000 || n < 1 )
{
System.Environment.Exit(1);
}
if(k > n || n < 1 )
{
System.Environment.Exit(1);
}
for(i = 0; i< n; i++)
{
if(a[i] > 1000000 || a[i] < 1 )
{
System.Environment.Exit(1);
}
}
for(j = 0; j<n; j++)
{
z = (j-k) %n;
if(z != 0)
{
z= (n+ z) %n;
}
temparray[z] = a[j];
}
//view array
for(i = 0; i< n; i++)
{
Console.Write(temparray[i] + " " );
}
}
}

Different value for every int variable

I have a five int variables:
int firstSequence;
int secondSequence;
int thirdSequence;
int fourthSequence;
int fifthSequence;
Every of these variable could have value from 1-5. How to check in the most efficient way, if every of these variable has unique value? I mean only one can have value = 1 etc.
private bool IsOrderCorrect()
{
if(firstSequence != secondSequence && ...)
}

Simply put them into an array then use Distinct:
new [] {
firstSequence,
secondSequence,
thirdSequence,
fourthSequence,
fifthSequence
}.Distinct().Count() == 5;

You could try
( (1 << firstSequence)
| (1 << secondSequence)
| (1 << thirdSequence)
| (1 << fourthSequence)
| (1 << fifthSequence))
== (1 << 1) | (1 << 2) | (1 << 3) | (1 << 4) | (1 << 5);

Here you go
List<int> uniqueCheck = new List<int>() { firstSequence, secondSequence, thirdSequence, fourthSequence, fifthSequence };
if(uniqueCheck.Distinct().Count() == uniqueCheck.Count())
{
//they are unique
}

I don't think that is the most efficient way.
The most efficient way would be to sum them and make sure the sum equals 15.
Testing this on my machine a 1000000 times results in the .Distinct().Count() == 5 method taking 244.77 milliseconds.
Doing the same thing but using .Sum() == 15 takes 54.92 so the sum method is more efficient.
Having said this, using Distinct().Count(), will generalise to more cases however the op asked for the most efficient way.
EDIT:
Sorry, I was rushing when I typed the original so it was flawed. My general method remains the same but instead of summing the numbers, you should sum the squares, which I believe should equal 55 and should only sum to 55 if the numbers are distint.
Testing with the sum of squares takes 139 milliseconds which is still faster than .Distinct().Count() == 5
So my answer should be updated to .Select(x => x*x).Sum() == 55

If they were in an array it would be very easy
int[] numbers = new int[] {1,2,3,4,5};
for (int i = 0; i < numbers.Length; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j!= i && j < numbers.Length; j++)
{
if (numbers[i] == numbers[j]) {
// you know what to do
}
}
}

Solving brain teaser using linq

At the very outset let me express my sincere thanks to Marc Gravel,Dahlbyk and the rest for helping me to apply linq practically.
The following are few questions which I have faced in an interview to solve applying Linq. As I am not familiar with Linq I solved it without using Linq.
I appreciate the answers which helps me to solve them using Linq
Thanks in advance.
Question 1:
The Problem is to find different digits such that,in whatever order they are used to make a three-digit number,that number will not be divisible by:
3,5,7,11,13 or 17.
To ensure that there is no ambuigity,suppose the three digits
are a,b,and c.Then,none of the combination of the numbers:
say abc,acb,bac,bca,cab and cba will divide by 3,5,7,11,13 or 17.
Example :
When I take 248 none of its combination(284,428,482,842,824) will exactly divisible by 3,5,7,11,13 or 17.
public void FindingRareNumbers()
{
for (int i = 1; i <= 9; i++)
{
for (int j = 1; j <= 9; j++)
{
for (int k = 1; k <= 9; k++)
{
//to form the three digit
string digit = i.ToString() + j.ToString() + k.ToString();
//converting to integer
int StrToDigit = Convert.ToInt32(digit);
char[] digitcombination = digit.ToCharArray();
string PossibleCombination = "";
bool testpassed = false;
int dcount = 0;
#region different possible combinations
for (int p = 0; p <= 2; p++)
{
for (int q = 0; q <= 2; q++)
{
for (int r = 0; r <= 2; r++)
{
// The following condition avoid the repeatance
// of digit like 111,111,111
if (p != q && p != r && r != q)
{
PossibleCombination =
digitcombination[p].ToString() +
digitcombination[q].ToString() +
digitcombination[r].ToString();
int num = Convert.ToInt32(PossibleCombination);
if (num % 3 != 0 && num % 5 != 0 && num % 7 != 0
&& num % 11 != 0 && num % 11 != 0
&& num % 13 != 0 && num % 17 != 0)
{
//count is increment for 6 times
// it satisfies the condition
dcount++;
testpassed = true;
}
}
}
}
}
#endregion combination
if (testpassed && dcount==6)
{
Console.WriteLine(StrToDigit);
}
}
}
}
}
(coding is working)
Question 2:
The task is to arrange the element in matrix so that all rows,columns,and diagonals add up to the same total.(Bit problem in coding ,I am trying to solve it).
------------------
1 2 3
-----------------
4 5 6
-----------------
7 8 9
-----------------
example :
The one of solutions is as follows:
-----------
2 9 4
-----------
7 5 3
----------
6 1 8
----------

I agree that Marc's solution to your first problem is a reasonable approach. But I think there's a larger question here, which is "how do I solve problems like this in a LINQ-ish manner?"
Notice how your solution is completely "procedural" and "imperative". Your code specifies a series of steps that you would execute, one after the other, with deep loops. Each step along the way is meaningless unless you understand its place in the larger whole.
There are two ideas I like to use when solving problems with LINQ:
Describe what the program is doing logically, rather than listing a series of commands
Characterize the problem as a query against a data set rather than as a procedure to follow.
So, what's our data set? We wish to filter out some elements from the set of all combinations of three digits.
How do we filter them? Permute the digits and then perform a divisibility check on each permutation.
OK, so now we have a structure for our program:
var query = from c in ThreeDigitCombinations()
where DivisibilityCheckPasses(c)
select c;
foreach(Combination result in query) Console.WriteLine(result);
And now you can continue breaking down each of those further, solving each sub-problem using LINQ in turn.
Same goes for your "magic square" problem; you're looking for a permutation that has a certain property, so write a generator of permutations, write a filter, and execute it.

For the first:
static IEnumerable<int> Permute(int x, int y, int z)
{
yield return x * 100 + y * 10 + z;
yield return x * 100 + z * 10 + y;
yield return y * 100 + x * 10 + z;
yield return y * 100 + z * 10 + x;
yield return z * 100 + x * 10 + y;
yield return z * 100 + y * 10 + x;
}
static void Main()
{
var divs = new[] {3,5,7,11,13,17};
// combinations of 1-9
var combinations =
from x in Enumerable.Range(1, 7)
from y in Enumerable.Range(x + 1, 8 - x)
from z in Enumerable.Range(y + 1, 9 - y)
select new { x, y, z };
// permute
var qry = from comb in combinations
where !Permute(comb.x, comb.y, comb.z).Any(
i => divs.Any(d => i % d == 0))
select comb;
foreach (var answer in qry)
{
Console.WriteLine("{0}, {1}, {2}", answer.x, answer.y, answer.z);
}
}
For the second - not elegant, but it works (returns the 8 permutations of the sample):
static void Main() {
var data = Enumerable.Range(1, 9);
var magicSquares =
// generate 1st row and deduce the target
from a in data let arrA = new[] { a }
from b in data.Except(arrA) let arrB = new[] { a,b }
from c in data.Except(arrB) let arrC = new[] { a,b,c }
let target = a + b + c
// generate 2nd row and filter to target matches
from d in data.Except(arrC) let arrD = new[] { a,b,c,d }
from e in data.Except(arrD) let arrE = new[] { a,b,c,d,e }
from f in data.Except(arrE) let arrF = new[] { a,b,c,d,e,f }
where d + e + f == target
// generate 3rd row and filter to target matches
from g in data.Except(arrF) let arrG = new[] { a,b,c,d,e,f,g }
from h in data.Except(arrG) let arrH = new[] { a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h }
from i in data.Except(arrH)
where g + h + i == target
// filter columns
&& a + d + g == target
&& b + e + h == target
&& c + f + i == target
// filter diagonals
&& a + e + i == target
&& c + e + g == target
select new {a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i};
foreach (var row in magicSquares)
{
Console.WriteLine("{0} {1} {2}", row.a, row.b, row.c);
Console.WriteLine("{0} {1} {2}", row.d, row.e, row.f);
Console.WriteLine("{0} {1} {2}", row.g, row.h, row.i);
Console.WriteLine();
}
}