Sum up of all elements of a C++ vector can be very easily done by std::accumulate method. It is defined in <numeric> header. It accumulates all the values present specified in the vector to the specified sum.
Appending to a vector means adding one or more elements at the back of the vector. The C++ vector has member functions. The member functions that can be used for appending are: push_back(), insert() and emplace(). The official function to be used to append is push_back().
The simple answer to the question:
template< typename T >
typename std::vector<T>::iterator
insert_sorted( std::vector<T> & vec, T const& item )
{
return vec.insert
(
std::upper_bound( vec.begin(), vec.end(), item ),
item
);
}
Version with a predicate.
template< typename T, typename Pred >
typename std::vector<T>::iterator
insert_sorted( std::vector<T> & vec, T const& item, Pred pred )
{
return vec.insert
(
std::upper_bound( vec.begin(), vec.end(), item, pred ),
item
);
}
Where Pred is a strictly-ordered predicate on type T.
For this to work the input vector must already be sorted on this predicate.
The complexity of doing this is O(log N)
for the upper_bound
search (finding where to insert) but up to O(N)
for the insert itself.
For a better complexity you could use std::set<T>
if there are not going to be any duplicates or std::multiset<T>
if there may be duplicates. These will retain a sorted order for you automatically and you can specify your own predicate on these too.
There are various other things you could do which are more complex, e.g. manage a vector
and a set
/ multiset
/ sorted vector
of newly added items then merge these in when there are enough of them. Any kind of iterating through your collection will need to run through both collections.
Using a second vector has the advantage of keeping your data compact. Here your "newly added" items vector
will be relatively small so the insertion time will be O(M)
where M
is the size of this vector and might be more feasible than the O(N)
of inserting in the big vector every time. The merge would be O(N+M)
which is better than O(NM)
it would be inserting one at a time, so in total it would be O(N+M) + O(M²)
to insert M
elements then merge.
You would probably keep the insertion vector at its capacity too, so as you grow that you will not be doing any reallocations, just moving of elements.
If you need to keep the vector sorted all the time, first you might consider whether using std::set
or std::multiset
won't simplify your code.
If you really need a sorted vector and want to quickly insert an element into it, but do not want to enforce a sorting criterion to be satisfied all the time, then you can first use std::lower_bound()
to find the position in a sorted range where the element should be inserted in logarithmic time, then use the insert()
member function of vector
to insert the element at that position.
If performance is an issue, consider benchmarking std::list
vs std::vector
. For small items, std::vector
is known to be faster because of a higher cache hit rate, but the insert()
operation itself is computationally faster on lists (no need to move elements around).
Just a note, you can use upper_bound
as well depending on your needs. upper_bound
will assure new entries that are equivalent to others will appear at the end of their sequence, lower_bound
will assure new entries equivalent to others will appear at the beginning of their sequence. Can be useful for certain implementations (maybe classes that can share a "position" but not all of their details!)
Both will assure you that the vector remains sorted according to <
result of elements, although inserting into lower_bound
will mean moving more elements.
Example:
insert 7 @ lower_bound of { 5, 7, 7, 9 } => { 5, *7*, 7, 7, 9 }
insert 7 @ upper_bound of { 5, 7, 7, 9 } => { 5, 7, 7, *7*, 9 }
Instead of inserting and sorting. You should do a find and then insert
Keep the vector sorted. (sort once). When you have to insert
find the first element that compares as greater to the one you are going to insert.
Do an insert just before that position.
This way the vector stays sorted.
Here is an example of how it goes.
start {} empty vector
insert 1 -> find first greater returns end() = 1 -> insert at 1 -> {1}
insert 5 -> find first greater returns end() = 2 -> insert at 2 -> {1,5}
insert 3 -> find first greater returns 2 -> insert at 2 -> {1,3,5}
insert 4 -> find first greater returns 3 -> insert at 3 -> {1,3,4,5}
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With