¿Expresión más concisa/eficiente para una lista cíclica?

What is the most concise/efficient function (in C++) to convert a "cyclic" index in a real index ?

My problem can be illustrated by the following image : enter image description here

I have a real list (a C++ vector for instance) of size size containing elements (here A, B, C, D, E). In order to mimic a "cyclic" list I am searching for a function to convert an input index (from -inf a +inf) to the real index of the list. With this function and the image example the code :

for(i=-10; i < 10; ++i) std::cout<<list[myFunction(i, list.size())]<<" ";

will print 4 times the list as displayed in the image.

My current expression of myFunction es:

inline int myFunction(const int i, const int size)
{
    return (i >= 0) ? (i%size) : ((size-((-i)%size))%size);
}

Do you think that there is a more simple/concise/efficient way to write this ?

preguntado el 25 de agosto de 12 a las 22:08

3 Respuestas

There are a couple of more concise ways of representing this. Both involve the fact that if i < 0, (i % size) + size is the number you are looking for. So, you can use

inline int myFunction(const int i, const int size)
{
    int index = i % size;
    return (index<0) ? (index+size) : index;
}

OR

inline int myFunction(const int i, const int size)
{
    return (((i%size)+size)%size);
}

Respondido 25 ago 12, 22:08

Why are you checking if index < 0? size is going to be 5 in this case, and the array goes from 0 to 4. i % size will give you a number from 0 to size - 1. return i % size, is good enough. - JustinDanielson

Because taking the modulus of a negative number can return a negative number (so -8%5 puede regresar -3) - murgatroid99 

size_t myFunction (const int i, const size_t size)   
{
  return (i - (i<1)) % size;
}

Concise, but not very clear since it exploits the bool/int conversions. I'd prefer an STL compliant circular buffer (like for example the boost implementation http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_50_0/libs/circular_buffer/doc/circular_buffer.html)

Respondido 25 ago 12, 22:08

Note that the sign of the result of the % operator is implementation-defined if either operand is negative in the '98 standard. - aib

I would suggest overloading the [] operator. As for the math, see @murgatroid99's answer.

Respondido 25 ago 12, 23:08

No es la respuesta que estás buscando? Examinar otras preguntas etiquetadas or haz tu propia pregunta.