set

问题 I was curious as to whether the following scenario is safe. I have the following class definitions: class ActiveStatusEffect { public: StatusEffect* effect; mutable int ReminaingTurns; ActiveStatusEffect() : ReminaingTurns(0) { } //Other unimportant stuff down here } I then store a group of these inside an std::set as follows: struct ASECmp { bool operator ()(const StatusEffects::ActiveStatusEffect &eff1, const StatusEffects::ActiveStatusEffect &eff2) { return eff1.effect->GetPriority() <

问题 Lets say you have a set: foo = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5} In the book I am currently reading, Pro Python, it says that using foo.pop() will pop an arbitrary number from that selection. BUT...When I try it out, it pops 1, then 2, then 3... Does it do it arbitrarily, or is this just a coincidence? 回答1: The reason it says it is arbitrary is because there is no guarantee about the ordering it will pop out. Since you just created the set, it may be storing the elements in a "nice" order, and thus .pop()

问题 Lets say you have a set: foo = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5} In the book I am currently reading, Pro Python, it says that using foo.pop() will pop an arbitrary number from that selection. BUT...When I try it out, it pops 1, then 2, then 3... Does it do it arbitrarily, or is this just a coincidence? 回答1: The reason it says it is arbitrary is because there is no guarantee about the ordering it will pop out. Since you just created the set, it may be storing the elements in a "nice" order, and thus .pop()

问题 I have a 2D list which I create like so: Z1 = [[0 for x in range(3)] for y in range(4)] I then proceed to populate this list, such that Z1 looks like this: [[1, 2, 3], [4, 5, 6], [2, 3, 1], [2, 5, 1]] I need to extract the unique 1x3 elements of Z1 , without regard to order: Z2 = makeUnique(Z1) # The solution The contents of Z2 should look like this: [[4, 5, 6], [2, 5, 1]] As you can see, I consider [1, 2, 3] and [2, 3, 1] to be duplicates because I don't care about the order. Also note that

问题 I have a set, namely of type multiset , I'm trying to use the upper_bound function to find the index of the element returned by the iterator. Usually with vectors, it works if I get the iterator and subtract vector.begin() from it to get the answer. However, when I try this with a set it gives an STL error, saying "no match for operator -' in ...(omitting STL details) Is there a fundamental reason for this ( sets being implemented as RB-trees and all). If so, can anyone suggest an alternate

问题 I have a set, namely of type multiset , I'm trying to use the upper_bound function to find the index of the element returned by the iterator. Usually with vectors, it works if I get the iterator and subtract vector.begin() from it to get the answer. However, when I try this with a set it gives an STL error, saying "no match for operator -' in ...(omitting STL details) Is there a fundamental reason for this ( sets being implemented as RB-trees and all). If so, can anyone suggest an alternate

问题 This question already has answers here : Closed 8 years ago . Possible Duplicate: How can I make my code be a set? python takes list and returns only if negative value also exists using set Basically I have a huge list: # with (n) being a number in the hundreds of thousands or millions def big_list(n): return [ randrange(n) for i in range(n) ] What I need to do is create a new list containing only the elements of big_list(n) that appear once using set . I'm really stuck so anything that could

问题 We know that this problem is np-complete, hence, no polynomial algorithm can be found for it. Also, we know that number of all partitions of a set is equal to the bell's number. I see there are few algorithms to generate all partitions of a set but couldn't find what is the time complexity to solve this problem. For example, this python code generates all partitions of a set recursively. What is the time complexity of this algorithm? Could this problem be solved with better time complexity?

问题 We know that this problem is np-complete, hence, no polynomial algorithm can be found for it. Also, we know that number of all partitions of a set is equal to the bell's number. I see there are few algorithms to generate all partitions of a set but couldn't find what is the time complexity to solve this problem. For example, this python code generates all partitions of a set recursively. What is the time complexity of this algorithm? Could this problem be solved with better time complexity?

问题 This question already has answers here : How to get Case Insensitive Python SET (6 answers) How do I do a case-insensitive string comparison? (9 answers) Closed 2 years ago . I have the following script to import and export random TXT/CSV files from CLI, everything that passes has to be unique and case insensitive output in UTF-8, can I accomplish this with a set variable? I'm quite new to Python so every comment or suggestion is welcome! This is my current script; import hashlib import sys