I have a class that is IComparable
:
public class a : IComparable { public int Id { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public a(int id) { this.Id = id; } public int CompareTo(object obj) { return this.Id.CompareTo(((a)obj).Id); } }
When I add a list of object of this class to a hash set:
a a1 = new a(1); a a2 = new a(2); HashSet<a> ha = new HashSet<a>(); ha.add(a1); ha.add(a2); ha.add(a1);
Everything is fine and ha.count
is 2
, but:
a a1 = new a(1); a a2 = new a(2); HashSet<a> ha = new HashSet<a>(); ha.add(a1); ha.add(a2); ha.add(new a(1));
Now ha.count
is 3
.
HashSet
respect a
's CompareTo
method.HashSet
the best way to have a list of unique objects?The equals() method of java. util. Set class is used to verify the equality of an Object with a Set and compare them. The method returns true if the size of both the sets are equal and both contain the same elements.
If two objects are equal according to the equals(Object) method, then calling the hashCode method on each of the two objects must produce the same integer result.
Comparison methodHashSet uses equal() and hashcode() methods to compare the elements, while TreeSet we can implements compareTo() method of Comparator interface so we have compare() and compareTo() method ,TreeSet does not use equal() and hashcode() method.
It uses an IEqualityComparer<T>
(EqualityComparer<T>.Default
unless you specify a different one on construction).
When you add an element to the set, it will find the hash code using IEqualityComparer<T>.GetHashCode
, and store both the hash code and the element (after checking whether the element is already in the set, of course).
To look an element up, it will first use the IEqualityComparer<T>.GetHashCode
to find the hash code, then for all elements with the same hash code, it will use IEqualityComparer<T>.Equals
to compare for actual equality.
That means you have two options:
IEqualityComparer<T>
into the constructor. This is the best option if you can't modify the T
itself, or if you want a non-default equality relation (e.g. "all users with a negative user ID are considered equal"). This is almost never implemented on the type itself (i.e. Foo
doesn't implement IEqualityComparer<Foo>
) but in a separate type which is only used for comparisons.GetHashCode
and Equals(object)
. Ideally, implement IEquatable<T>
in the type as well, particularly if it's a value type. These methods will be called by the default equality comparer.Note how none of this is in terms of an ordered comparison - which makes sense, as there are certainly situations where you can easily specify equality but not a total ordering. This is all the same as Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
, basically.
If you want a set which uses ordering instead of just equality comparisons, you should use SortedSet<T>
from .NET 4 - which allows you to specify an IComparer<T>
instead of an IEqualityComparer<T>
. This will use IComparer<T>.Compare
- which will delegate to IComparable<T>.CompareTo
or IComparable.CompareTo
if you're using Comparer<T>.Default
.
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