Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C++ > combining two vectors

Reply
Thread Tools

combining two vectors

 
 
Alan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-14-2006
Is there an easy and efficient way to combine two <vector>s, rather
than taking each element from one and adding it to the other?

I haven`t been able to find any guidance on or examples of this
sort of operation.

Thanks, Alan

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ian Collins
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-14-2006
Alan wrote:
> Is there an easy and efficient way to combine two <vector>s, rather
> than taking each element from one and adding it to the other?
>
> I haven`t been able to find any guidance on or examples of this
> sort of operation.
>


vector1.insert( vector1.end(), vector2.begin(), vector2.end() );

--
Ian Collins.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Alan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-14-2006
Ian, Thanks! Alan

 
Reply With Quote
 
Stefan Naewe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-15-2006
Ian Collins schrieb:
> Alan wrote:
>> Is there an easy and efficient way to combine two <vector>s, rather
>> than taking each element from one and adding it to the other?
>>
>> I haven`t been able to find any guidance on or examples of this
>> sort of operation.
>>

>
> vector1.insert( vector1.end(), vector2.begin(), vector2.end() );
>


It's easy - yes.
But is it really efficient ?
Isn't it as unefficient as repeatedly calling push_bask() on vector1 ?

/S
--
Stefan Naewe
stefan_DOT_naewe_AT_atlas_DOT_de
 
Reply With Quote
 
Pete Becker
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-15-2006
Stefan Naewe wrote:
> Ian Collins schrieb:
>> Alan wrote:
>>> Is there an easy and efficient way to combine two <vector>s, rather
>>> than taking each element from one and adding it to the other?
>>>
>>> I haven`t been able to find any guidance on or examples of this
>>> sort of operation.
>>>

>> vector1.insert( vector1.end(), vector2.begin(), vector2.end() );
>>

>
> It's easy - yes.
> But is it really efficient ?
> Isn't it as unefficient as repeatedly calling push_bask() on vector1 ?
>


No. The iterators that represent the range being copied are random
access iterators, so insert can figure out how many elements will be
added and adjust the size accordingly. Repeatedly calling push_back
could end up reallocating the storage space more than once.

--

-- Pete
Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. (www.versatilecoding.com)
Author of "The Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and
Reference." (www.petebecker.com/tr1book)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Stefan Naewe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-15-2006
Pete Becker schrieb:
> Stefan Naewe wrote:
>> Ian Collins schrieb:
>>> Alan wrote:
>>>> Is there an easy and efficient way to combine two <vector>s, rather
>>>> than taking each element from one and adding it to the other?
>>>>
>>>> I haven`t been able to find any guidance on or examples of this
>>>> sort of operation.
>>>>
>>> vector1.insert( vector1.end(), vector2.begin(), vector2.end() );
>>>

>>
>> It's easy - yes.
>> But is it really efficient ?
>> Isn't it as unefficient as repeatedly calling push_bask() on vector1 ?
>>

>
> No. The iterators that represent the range being copied are random
> access iterators, so insert can figure out how many elements will be
> added and adjust the size accordingly. Repeatedly calling push_back
> could end up reallocating the storage space more than once.


OK.
But what if I do a vector1.reserve(x) (with a valid x...) before ?
'vector2.end()-vector2.begin()' elements need to be copied after vector1.end(), right?

(Using std::list and std::list::splice() would be more efficient in this case, wouldn't it?)


/S
--
Stefan Naewe
stefan_DOT_naewe_AT_atlas_DOT_de
 
Reply With Quote
 
red floyd
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-15-2006
Stefan Naewe wrote:
> Ian Collins schrieb:
>> Alan wrote:
>>> Is there an easy and efficient way to combine two <vector>s, rather
>>> than taking each element from one and adding it to the other?
>>>
>>> I haven`t been able to find any guidance on or examples of this
>>> sort of operation.
>>>

>> vector1.insert( vector1.end(), vector2.begin(), vector2.end() );
>>

>
> It's easy - yes.
> But is it really efficient ?
> Isn't it as unefficient as repeatedly calling push_bask() on vector1 ?


Why does everyone ask "is this more efficient" in a vacuum?

Have you benchmarked to determine that your vector operations are the
bottleneck? An "efficient" program that doesn't work right is not as
good as an "inefficient" program that does.

Hoare's Law (also attributed to Knuth): "Premature optimization is the
root of all evil".
 
Reply With Quote
 
Pete Becker
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-15-2006
red floyd wrote:
> Stefan Naewe wrote:
>> Ian Collins schrieb:
>>> Alan wrote:
>>>> Is there an easy and efficient way to combine two <vector>s, rather
>>>> than taking each element from one and adding it to the other?
>>>>
>>>> I haven`t been able to find any guidance on or examples of this
>>>> sort of operation.
>>>>
>>> vector1.insert( vector1.end(), vector2.begin(), vector2.end() );
>>>

>>
>> It's easy - yes.
>> But is it really efficient ?
>> Isn't it as unefficient as repeatedly calling push_bask() on vector1 ?

>
> Why does everyone ask "is this more efficient" in a vacuum?
>
> Have you benchmarked to determine that your vector operations are the
> bottleneck? An "efficient" program that doesn't work right is not as
> good as an "inefficient" program that does.
>


And how is changing from push_back to insert going to make this code not
work right?

> Hoare's Law (also attributed to Knuth): "Premature optimization is the
> root of all evil".


Okay, let's all use bubble sort until we can prove that quicksort will
be a better choice.

Sometimes optimization without measurement is perfectly appropriate.
When there's a choice of two ways to do something and one is slower,
choose the other.

for (iter = vector2.begin(); iter != vector2.end(); ++iter)
vector1.push_back(*iter);

versus

vector1.insert(vector1.end(), vector2.begin(), vector2.end());

No contest. Use the latter.

--

-- Pete
Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. (www.versatilecoding.com)
Author of "The Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and
Reference." (www.petebecker.com/tr1book)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ian Collins
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-15-2006
Pete Becker wrote:
> red floyd wrote:
>
>>
>> Why does everyone ask "is this more efficient" in a vacuum?
>>
>> Have you benchmarked to determine that your vector operations are the
>> bottleneck? An "efficient" program that doesn't work right is not as
>> good as an "inefficient" program that does.
>>

>
> And how is changing from push_back to insert going to make this code not
> work right?
>
>> Hoare's Law (also attributed to Knuth): "Premature optimization is the
>> root of all evil".

>
>
> Okay, let's all use bubble sort until we can prove that quicksort will
> be a better choice.
>
> Sometimes optimization without measurement is perfectly appropriate.
> When there's a choice of two ways to do something and one is slower,
> choose the other.
>

Agreed, maybe the quote should be changed to "Premature
micro-optimisation is the root of all evil" to differentiate between
code tweaks and choice of algorithm.

--
Ian Collins.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alf P. Steinbach
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-15-2006
* Ian Collins:
> Pete Becker wrote:
>> red floyd wrote:
>>
>>> Hoare's Law (also attributed to Knuth): "Premature optimization is the
>>> root of all evil".

>>
>> Okay, let's all use bubble sort until we can prove that quicksort will
>> be a better choice.
>>
>> Sometimes optimization without measurement is perfectly appropriate.
>> When there's a choice of two ways to do something and one is slower,
>> choose the other.
>>

> Agreed, maybe the quote should be changed to "Premature
> micro-optimisation is the root of all evil" to differentiate between
> code tweaks and choice of algorithm.


Isn't that an optimization?

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
c++ primer statement about vectors containing vectors pauldepstein@att.net C++ 3 03-26-2008 06:22 PM
Ruby, SWIG and C++: how to properly wrap vector of vectors of doubles (2D vectors)? Ruby 0 09-14-2005 05:47 PM
combining two EDF netlist in ISE williams VHDL 1 04-18-2005 08:59 PM
combining two stl vectors vasileios zografos C++ 3 12-20-2003 10:07 PM
Combining Two Data Sources for one Data List Winterminute ASP .Net 0 12-03-2003 06:03 PM



Advertisments