Related
In Swift there is a Form... equivalent for the Sets methods intersection(), symmetricDifference() and union(), i.e. formIntersection(), formSymmetricDifference() and formUnion().
But for the method subtracting() there is no method called formSubtracting. Does anyone know why this is so, because it seams I now have to use something like mySet = mySet.subtracting(anotherSet)
subtract(_:) is what you are looking for:
Removes the elements of the given set from this set.
Example:
var mySet: Set = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
let anotherSet : Set = [2, 4, 6, 8]
mySet.subtract(anotherSet)
print(mySet) // [3, 1, 5]
There is also a variant which takes another sequence (of the same element type) as the argument, e.g. an array:
var mySet: Set = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
let anotherSequence = [2, 4, 6, 8]
mySet.subtract(anotherSequence)
print(mySet) // [3, 1, 5]
Is there a way to merge two Flux such that the result only contains unique elements? I can block on the output and then convert it to a set, but is there a way that does not depend on blocking?
Source (Kotlin)
val set1 = Flux.just(1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
val set2 = Flux.just(2, 4, 6, 8, 10)
val mergedSet = set1.mergeWith(set2)
println(mergedSet.collectList().block())
Output
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10]
Desired Output (order is not important)
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10]
You can use the Flux's merge method and then apply distinct() to it.
Flux.merge (Flux.just(1, 2, 3, 4, 5), Flux.just(2, 4, 6, 8, 10)).distinct();
This way you get a flux which produces only distinct values.
I'd like to take a RDD of integer lists and reduce it down to one list. For example...
[1, 2, 3, 4]
[2, 3, 4, 5]
to
[3, 5, 7, 9]
I can do this in python using the zip function but not sure how to replicate it in spark besides doing collect on the object but I want to keep the data in the rdd.
If all elements in rdd are of the same length, you can use reduce with zip:
rdd = sc.parallelize([[1,2,3,4],[2,3,4,5]])
rdd.reduce(lambda x, y: [i+j for i, j in zip(x, y)])
# [3, 5, 7, 9]
I have written the program below for generating random unique numbers for several number of times by invoking the function, but it seems like I'm getting the same pattern with minimal changes.
func generateRandom(withinNumber: Int) {
var i:Int = 0
var elements = Set<Int>()
while i != withinNumber {
let num:Int = Int(arc4random())%withinNumber + 1
if elements.count <= withinNumber && elements.contains(num) == false {
elements.insert(num)
}
else {
i = i-1
}
i=i+1
}
print(elements)
elements.removeAll()
}
generateRandom(withinNumber: 10)
How does I make my program effectively run to generate several random unique numbers.
Please let me know it would be very helpful for me.
You are storing your numbers in a Set and sets are not ordered, so the order the elements are shown by print is unrelated to the order in which they were added to the set.
Rather the elements of a set are stored in some manner which enables fast checking for .contains(), and this is one reason you seeing similar sequences.
If you wish to preserve order of insertion use a collection which does this, i.e. an array. Changing to an array in your code produced the following results from 9 calls:
[8, 9, 7, 10, 5, 6, 2, 3, 1, 4]
[4, 9, 10, 3, 6, 2, 1, 7, 8, 5]
[8, 3, 5, 1, 6, 4, 9, 10, 7, 2]
[5, 7, 2, 9, 8, 1, 6, 10, 3, 4]
[2, 3, 7, 6, 9, 1, 8, 10, 5, 4]
[9, 10, 2, 4, 6, 8, 5, 7, 1, 3]
[9, 10, 2, 5, 4, 7, 3, 8, 1, 6]
[1, 6, 4, 5, 8, 2, 3, 9, 7, 10]
[6, 10, 5, 3, 2, 8, 1, 9, 7, 4]
You are also generating 10 random numbers in the range 1 to 10 and avoiding duplicates, so the results is always going to be the numbers 1 to 10 in some order.
To generate a random number in a given range do not use %, instead use the provided arc4random_uniform() which will give better a better distribution.
The function mention in your title arc4random_stir() is available in Swift.
BTW (somewhat opinion based): It is better to write !e (! being the boolean not operator) rather than e == false, and never ever write e == true which is the long form of e!
BTW (SO etiquette): Don't link to your code (or paste in images of it). Reduce to a small example which demonstrates the issue (not required in your case) and insert directly in the question. Keep tags minimal and appropriate. These edits were done for you this time by myself and others, you will know for next time.
HTH
I have written a code to find determinant of a 10X10 matrix. This code gives the proper result till 9X9 matrix. But for 10X10 matrix gives the following error
"Use of Uninitialized value in multiplication <*> at line 23
Illegal division by zero at line 21"
I tried for 11X11 matrix also, but it is giving the wrong answer.
Why this code is giving such error...
Following is the code:
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
my #x1=(
[5, 6, 3, 2, 4, 9, 3, 5, 4, 2],
[12, 9, 8, 3, 3, 0, 6, 9, 3, 4],
[8, 6, 5, 8, 9, 3, 9, 3, 9, 5],
[6, 4, 3, 0, 6, 4, 8, 2, 22, 8],
[8, 3, 2, 5, 2, 12, 7, 1, 6, 9],
[5, 9, 3, 9, 5, 1, 3, 8, 4, 2],
[3, 10, 4, 16, 4, 7, 2, 12, 9, 6],
[2, 12, 9, 13, 8, 3, 1, 16, 0, 6],
[3, 6, 8, 5, 12, 8, 4, 19, 8, 5],
[2, 5, 6, 4, 9, 10, 3, 11, 7, 3]
);
# Matrix of nxn
for (my $i=0;$i le 9;$i++) {
for (my $j=0;$j le 9;$j++) {
if($j>$i) {
my $ratio = $x1[$j][$i]/$x1[$i][$i];
for(my $k = 0; $k le 9; $k++){
$x1[$j][$k] -= $ratio * $x1[$i][$k];
}
}
}
}
my $det1 = 1;
for(my $i = 0; $i le 9; $i++){
$det1 *= $x1[$i][$i];
}
printf $det1," ";
le doesn't do what you think it does. http://perldoc.perl.org/perlop.html
Binary "le" returns true if the left argument is stringwise less than or equal to the right argument.
print 10 le 9,"\n";
print 10 <= 9,"\n";
It's a stringwise comparison not a numeric one.
So "10" le "9" is true, because alphabetically 10 is before 9.
But this would work fine for a smaller matrix, because 9 le 8 is a valid comparison and works the 'right way'.
You should use <= instead:
Binary "<=" returns true if the left argument is numerically less than or equal to the right argument.
You can also probably auto-scale by using $#x1 for your comparison, which is the value of the last array index. In your example above, $#x1 is 9, because your array is 0-9