def adjacent_sum(arr)
narr = []
l = arr.length
arr.each.with_index do |num,index|
if index < arr.size-1
narr << arr[index] + arr[index+1]
end
end
return narr
end
print adjacent_sum([3, 7, 2, 11]) #=> [10, 9, 13], because [ 3+7, 7+2, 2+11 ]
puts
print adjacent_sum([2, 5, 1, 9, 2, 4]) #=> [7, 6, 10, 11, 6], because [2+5, 5+1, 1+9, 9+2, 2+4]
puts
Write a method pyramid_sum that takes in an array of numbers representing the base of a pyramid. The function should return a 2D array representing a complete pyramid with the given base. To construct a level of the pyramid, we take the sum of adjacent elements of the level below.
I understand that I must make a 2-D array and use adjacent addition to build the next level of the pyramid but I don't understand the basic mechanics or thinking methodology in Ruby for two-dimensional arrays. Why am I getting array and what approach do you suggest?
base = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
(base.size-1).times.with_object([base]) do |_,arr|
arr << arr.last.each_cons(2).map(&:sum)
end.reverse
#=> [
# [48]
# [20, 28],
# [8, 12, 16],
# [3, 5, 7, 9],
# [1, 2, 3, 4, 5],
# ]
See Enumerable#each_cons, a lovely method.
Related
I have an array
array_a1 = [9,43,3,6,7,0]
which I'm trying to get the sort indices out of, i.e. the answer should be
array_ordered = [6, 3, 4, 5, 1, 2]
I want to do this as a function, so that
def order (array)
will return array_ordered
I have tried implementing advice from Find the index by current sort order of an array in ruby but I don't see how I can do what they did for an array :(
if there are identical values in the array, e.g.
array_a1 = [9,43,3,6,7,7]
then the result should look like:
array_ordered = [3, 4, 5, 6, 1, 2]
(all indices should be 0-based, but these are 1-based)
You can do it this way:
[9,43,3,6,7,0].
each_with_index.to_a. # [[9, 0], [43, 1], [3, 2], [6, 3], [7, 4], [0, 5]]
sort_by(&:first). # [[0, 5], [3, 2], [6, 3], [7, 4], [9, 0], [43, 1]]
map(&:last)
#=> [5, 2, 3, 4, 0, 1]
First you add index to each element, then you sort by the element and finally you pick just indices.
Note, that array are zero-indexed in Ruby, so the results is less by one comparing to your spec.
You should be able to just map over the sorted array and lookup the index of that number in the original array.
arr = [9,43,3,6,7,0]
arr.sort.map { |n| arr.index(n) } #=> [5, 2, 3, 4, 0, 1]
Or if you really want it 1 indexed, instead of zero indexed, for some reason:
arr.sort.map { |n| arr.index(n) + 1 } #=> [6, 3, 4, 5, 1, 2]
array_a1 = [9,43,3,6,7,0]
array_a1.each_index.sort_by { |i| array_a1[i] }
#=> [5, 2, 3, 4, 0, 1]
If array_a1 may contain duplicates and ties are to be broken by the indices of the elements (the element with the smaller index first), you may modify the calculation as follows.
[9,43,3,6,7,7].each_index.sort_by { |i| [array_a1[i], i] }
#=> [2, 3, 4, 5, 0, 1]
Enumerable#sort_by compares two elements with the spaceship operator, <=>. Here, as pairs of arrays are being compared, it is the method Array#<=> that is used. See especially the third paragraph of that doc.
a = [6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
b = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
each of array a's items are divided by each of array b's items and put into a new array called c.
c = [6, 3, 2, 2, 2]
a = [6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
b = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
c = a.zip(b).map { |e| e.reduce :/ }
#⇒ [
# [0] 6,
# [1] 3,
# [2] 2,
# [3] 2,
# [4] 2
# ]
Array#zip zips the arrays together and then each element (array of 2 items zipped) is reduced with Integer#/.
I like mudasobwa's zip/map solution, but here are a couple alternatives:
a = [6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
b = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
c = Array.new(a.size) { |i| a[i] / b[i] }
c = a.map.with_index { |x, i| x / b[i] }
In particular, I might prefer the Array.new solution if the arrays aren't guaranteed to be the same length, because you can easily ensure you don't go over bounds:
c = Array.new([a.size, b.size].min) { |i| a[i] / b[i] }
I'm using Ruby 2.4. If I have an ordered array of numbers, say
[1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9]
How do I find the numerical elements that aren't present in my array, between the smallest and greatest values in the array? For instance in the above, the missing values are
[3, 5, 6]
If my array were
[2, 7]
the missing values I'd be looking for would be
[3, 4, 5, 6]
Remove the existing numbers from the expected range of numbers:
(numbers.first..numbers.last).to_a - numbers
If you prefer complicated solutions:
[1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9].chunk_while { |a, b| a + 1 == b }
.each_cons(2)
.flat_map { |x, y| (x.last + 1).upto(y.first - 1).to_a }
#=> [3, 5, 6]
I have array and sum_of_two:
array = [10, 5, 1, 9, 7, 8, 2, 4, 6, 9, 3, 2, 1, 4, 8, 7, 5]
sum_of_two = 10
I'm trying to find the combination of two integers in array whose latter element of the two appears the earliest among those of such combinations whose sum equals sum_of_two. For example, both [5, 5] and [1, 9] are candidates for such combinations, but 9 of [1, 9] (which appears later than 1 in array) appears earlier than the second 5 of [5, 5] (which is the last element in array). So I would like to return [1, 9].
I tried using combination and find:
array.combination(2).find{|x,y| x + y == sum_of_two} #=> [5, 5]
However, it returns a combination of the first integer in the array, 5 , and another integer further along the array, also 5.
If I use find_all instead of find, I get all combinations of two integers that add up to sum_of_two:
array.combination(2).find_all{|x,y| x + y == sum_of_two}
#=> [[5, 5], [1, 9], [1, 9], [9, 1], [7, 3], [8, 2], [8, 2], [2, 8], [4, 6], [6, 4], [9, 1], [3, 7], [2, 8]]
But then I'm not sure how to get the first one.
I would use Set (which would be a bit more efficient than using Array#include?) and do something like this:
array = [10, 5, 1, 9, 7, 8, 2, 4, 6, 9, 3, 2, 1, 4, 8, 7, 5]
sum_of_two = 10
require 'set'
array.each_with_object(Set.new) do |element, set|
if set.include?(sum_of_two - element)
break [sum_of_two - element, element]
else
set << element
end
end
#=> [1, 9]
x = array.find.with_index{|e, i| array.first(i).include?(sum_of_two - e)}
[sum_of_two - x, x] # => [1, 9]
Array#combination(n) does not give the elements in the order you want, so you must build the pairs yourself. It's easy if you begin from the second index. A O(n) lazy implementation, and let's call the input xs:
pairs = (1...xs.size).lazy.flat_map { |j| (0...j).lazy.map { |i| [xs[i], xs[j]] } }
first_matching_pair = pairs.detect { |i, j| i + j == 10 }
#=> [1, 9]
I've been scanning the forums and haven't found an answer yet that I can apply to my situation. I need to be able to take an n by n array and transpose it in Python-3. The example given is that I have this list input into the function:
[[4, 2, 1], ["a", "a", "a"], [-1, -2, -3]] and it needs to be transposed to read:
[[4, 'a', -1], [2, 'a', -2], [1, 'a', -3]] So basically reading vertically instead of horizontally.
I CANNOT use things like zip or numpy, I have to make my own function.
Been rattling my brain at this for two nights and it's a huge headache. If anyone could help and then provide an explanation so I can learn it, I'd be grateful.
Edit:
I should add for reference sake that the argument variable is M. The function we're supposed to write is trans(M):
A one-liner:
def trans(M):
return [[M[j][i] for j in range(len(M))] for i in range(len(M[0]))]
result:
>>> M = [[1, 2, 3], [4, 5, 6], [7, 8, 9]]
>>> trans(M)
[[1, 4, 7], [2, 5, 8], [3, 6, 9]
# or for a non-square matrix:
>>> N = [[1, 2, 3], [4, 5, 6], [7, 8, 9], [10, 11, 12]]
>>> trans(N)
[[1, 4, 7, 10], [2, 5, 8, 11], [3, 6, 9, 12]]
Additional Note: If you look up the tutorial on list comprehension, one of the examples is in fact transposition of a matrix array.
A variant that should work for matrices with irregular row lengths:
m=[[3, 2, 1],
[0, 1],
[2, 1, 0]]
m_T = [ [row[c] for row in m if c < len(row)] for c in range(0, max([len(row) for row in m])) ]
Here is an in place solution that works for square matrices:
def trans(M):
n = len(M)
for i in range(n - 1):
for j in range(i + 1, n):
M[i][j], M[j][i] = M[j][i], M[i][j]
Example Usage:
def print_matrix(M):
for row in M:
for ele in row:
print(ele, end='\t')
print()
M = [[4, 2, 1], ["a", "a", "a"], [-1, -2, -3]]
print('Original Matrix:')
print_matrix(M)
trans(M)
print('Transposed Matrix:')
print_matrix(M)
Output:
Original Matrix:
4 2 1
a a a
-1 -2 -3
Transposed Matrix:
4 a -1
2 a -2
1 a -3
y=([1,2], [3,4], [5,6])
transpose=[[row[i] for row in y] for i in range(len(y[0]))]
the output is
[[1, 3, 5], [2, 4, 6]]
You can also use the function in numpy to transpose - if you need the answer as a list it is straightforward to convert back using tolist:
from numpy import transpose
M = [[1, 2, 3], [4, 5, 6], [7, 8, 9]]
transpose(M).tolist()
the output is
[[1, 4, 7], [2, 5, 8], [3, 6, 9]]
Haven't timed it (no time!) but I strongly suspect this will be a lot faster than iterators for large arrays, especially if you don't need to convert back to a list.