I would like to compare lists of elements of a given type, to see which list is "big开发者_如何学Cger".
new BuiltInComparer<IEnumerable<int>>().Compare(
new[] {3,2,3},
new[] {1,2,3})
...would return 1
new BuiltInComparer<IEnumerable<int>>().Compare(
new[] {1,2,3},
new[] {1,2,4})
...would return -1 etc
Is there any such built in comparer?
I don't think there's anything built into the framework - and as Eric says, you haven't provided the comparison criteria. If you mean "compare element-wise in the natural way, and assume a 'missing' element is smaller than any present element" (i.e. a longer sequence beats a shorter subsequence if they're equal where possible) then something like this would do it:
public int SequenceCompare<T>(IEnumerable<T> source1, IEnumerable<T> source2)
{
// TODO: Parameter validation :)
// You could add an overload with this as a parameter
IComparer<T> elementComparer = Comparer<T>.Default;
using (IEnumerator<T> iterator1 = source1.GetEnumerator())
using (IEnumerator<T> iterator2 = source2.GetEnumerator())
{
while (true)
{
bool next1 = iterator1.MoveNext();
bool next2 = iterator2.MoveNext();
if (!next1 && !next2) // Both sequences finished
{
return 0;
}
if (!next1) // Only the first sequence has finished
{
return -1;
}
if (!next2) // Only the second sequence has finished
{
return 1;
}
// Both are still going, compare current elements
int comparison = elementComparer.Compare(iterator1.Current,
iterator2.Current);
// If elements are non-equal, we're done
if (comparison != 0)
{
return comparison;
}
}
}
}
More polished version:
public static class EnumerableExtensions
{
/// <summary>
/// Performs lexical comparison of 2 IEnumerable collections holding elements of type T.
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="T">Type of collection elements.</typeparam>
/// <param name="first">The first collection to compare.</param>
/// <param name="second">The second collection to compare.</param>
/// <returns>A signed integer that indicates the relative values of a and b:
/// Less than zero: first is less than second;
/// Zero: first is equal to second;
/// Greater than zero: first is greater than second.
/// </returns>
/// <remarks>
/// Can be called as either static method: EnumerableExtensions.Compare(a, b) or
/// extension method: a.Compare(b).
/// </remarks>
public static int Compare<T>(this IEnumerable<T> first, IEnumerable<T> second)
{
// If one of collection objects is null, use the default Comparer class
// (null is considered to be less than any other object)
if (first == null || second == null)
return Comparer.Default.Compare(first, second);
var elementComparer = Comparer<T>.Default;
int compareResult;
using (var firstEnum = first.GetEnumerator())
using (var secondEnum = second.GetEnumerator())
{
do
{
bool gotFirst = firstEnum.MoveNext();
bool gotSecond = secondEnum.MoveNext();
// Reached the end of collections => assume equal
if (!gotFirst && !gotSecond)
return 0;
// Different sizes => treat collection of larger size as "greater"
if (gotFirst != gotSecond)
return gotFirst ? 1 : -1;
compareResult = elementComparer.Compare(firstEnum.Current, secondEnum.Current);
} while (compareResult == 0);
}
return compareResult;
}
}
If you're on .NET 4 (and it doesn't sound like you are), I think you might be able to do something clever with Enumerable.Zip. Something like:
var r = x.Zip(y, comparer.Compare).FirstOrDefault(c => c != 0);
though I can't see right now how to efficiently deal with the case where the shorter one is the same as the longer one, as far as it goes.
Edit: If you're only comparing arrays (or otherwise don't care about measuring your collections twice), then I think you can simply add:
if (r == 0) {
r = int.Compare(x.Count(), y.Count());
}
You could even combine these as:
var r = x.Zip(y, comparer.Compare)
.Concat(new [] { int.Compare(x.Count(), y.Count()) })
.FirstOrDefault(c => c != 0)
(And if you're on .NET 3.5, then add a Zip extension method, because it's easy to write and seriously useful all over the place! I don't know why it wasn't included in the initial Linq release.)
There isn't a built-in comparer. However, this is a requirement that arises frequently. I've covered the topic at substantial length in my SequenceComparer<T>
article; here is a simplified implementation:
public class SequenceComparer<TElement> : Comparer<IEnumerable<TElement>>
{
private readonly IComparer<TElement> _elementComparer;
public SequenceComparer(IComparer<TElement> elementComparer = null)
{
_elementComparer = elementComparer ?? Comparer<TElement>.Default;
}
public override int Compare(IEnumerable<TElement> x, IEnumerable<TElement> y)
{
// Get enumerators to iterate over both sequences in sync.
using (IEnumerator<TElement> xEnumerator = x.GetEnumerator())
using (IEnumerator<TElement> yEnumerator = y.GetEnumerator())
{
// Advance both enumerators to their next element,
// until at least one passes the end of its sequence.
bool xMove, yMove;
while ((xMove = xEnumerator.MoveNext()) &&
(yMove = yEnumerator.MoveNext()))
{
// Compare the current pair of elements across the two sequences,
// seeking element inequality.
int elementComparison = _elementComparer.Compare(xEnumerator.Current, yEnumerator.Current);
if (elementComparison != 0)
return elementComparison;
}
// Determine the relative length of the two sequences based on the final values of xMove and yMove.
return xMove.CompareTo(yMove);
}
}
}
精彩评论