I need to print all possible series that their sum is equal to N;
for example is n == 4 the output should be:
[1, 1, 1, 1]
[1, 1, 2]
[1, 2, 1]
[1, 3]
[2, 1, 1]
[2, 2]
[3, 1]
[4]
My way of thinking to solve this problem was:
print the series that the number i is not in the series
print the series that the number i is in the series, now need to find the sum of N-i.
my code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void printArr(int arr[], int n)
{
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
{
printf(" %d ", arr[i]);
}
printf("\n");
}
void printAllHelper(int* a,int size, int sum, int used,int index) {
if (sum == 0) {
a -= used;
printArr(a, used);
}
else if (sum < 0 || index == size)
{
return;
}
else {
for(int i = 1 ; i <= size ; i ++)
{
printAllHelper(a, size, sum, used, index + 1);
if (i <= sum)
{
*a = i;
}
printAllHelper(a+1, size, sum -i, used +1, index + 1);
}
}
}
void printAll(int num) {
int* myArray = (int*)malloc(num * sizeof(int));
printAllHelper(myArray,num,num,0,0);
}
void main() {
printAll(4);
}
my output:
3 1
3 1
3 1
3 1
3 1
3 1
3 1
3 1
3 1
4
1 3
4
2 2
4
3 1
4
4
1 3
1 1 2
1 3
1 2 1
1 3
1 3
1 3
4
1 3
4
2 2
4
3 1
4
4
2 2
2 1 1
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
4
1 3
4
2 2
4
3 1
4
4
3 1
3 1
3 1
3 1
3 1
4
1 3
4
2 2
4
3 1
4
4
4
4
Please try to explain to me your way of thinking, and how you approach this kind of problem, I want to be the very best like no one ever was :(.....
Your reasoning is not quite correct, but your code is almost right. The loop in your else part should be
for(int i = 1 ; i <= sum ; i ++) {
*a = i;
printAllHelper(a+1, size, sum-i, used+1, index+1);
}
With this, I get the output
1 1 1 1
1 1 2
1 2 1
1 3
2 1 1
2 2
3 1
4
The idea is basically: "The numbers sum to sum if the first number i is any number from 1 to sum and the rest of the numbers sum to sum - i."
Also, note that your code shows some room for improvement, e.g. the used and index variables seem a bit redundant. And with not adding numbers larger than sum or smaller than 1, the check whether sum < 0 || index == size is not necessary, either. Thus you also do not need the size parameter. Your printAllHelper could be simplified to something like this:
void printAllHelper(int* a, int sum, int index) {
if (sum == 0) {
printArr(a, index);
} else {
for(int i = 1 ; i <= sum ; i++) {
a[index] = i;
printAllHelper(a, sum-i, index+1);
}
}
}
(Note: C is not my native language, if you see more things to improve, please comment.)
Related
I'm trying to take a N*N 2-D array, have each process be responsible for a number of columns, carry out an action on the elements and gather them back together into a single 2-D array again.
I have managed to divide the columns among the processes, carry out the action and bring them back together using MPI subarrays and Gatherv. However, when I give the program a number of processes that doesn't equally divide into the number of columns, the returned data is misplaced.
With the master matrix being 12x12, I provide four processes and get the correct result back:
FINAL MATRIX
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
When the matrix is still 12x12 and I provide five processes, I get this output:
FINAL MATRIX
1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
5 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
5 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
5 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
5 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
5 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
5 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
5 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
5 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Can someone inform me as to what I've configured incorrectly for this to be the result? Ultimately, after resolving this, I wish to switch the Gatherv to Allgatherv so that each process has the entire 2-D array locally for further alterations.
Update (11/04/2021)
As suggested by Gilles I have attempted to use column vectors instead but could not find a way in which to recombine with Gatherv. I believe my issue with my current solution may be due to displacements as manually altering these causes changes in the output (populating some of the zero cells).
Full code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <mpi.h>
void print_matrix (double ** X, int rows, int cols)
{
for (int i = 0; i < rows; ++i) {
for (int j = 0; j < cols; ++j)
printf ("%.0f ", X[i][j]);
printf ("\n");
}
}
double **alloc_2d_array(int m, int n) {
double **x;
int i;
x = (double **)malloc(m*sizeof(double *));
x[0] = (double *)calloc(m*n,sizeof(double));
for ( i = 1; i < m; i++ )
x[i] = &x[0][i*n];
return x;
}
void main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
int n = 12;
int ndims = 2;
int rank, size;
int root_rank = 0;
MPI_Datatype sendsubarray, recvsubarray, resizedrecvsubarray;
MPI_Init(&argc,&argv);
MPI_Comm_rank(MPI_COMM_WORLD, &rank);
MPI_Comm_size(MPI_COMM_WORLD, &size);
// Report active to console
printf("Rank: %d, reporting!\n", rank);
// Make master matrix
double ** master_matrix = alloc_2d_array(n, n);
// Set starting values in master matrix
for (int i=0; i<n; i++) {
for (int j=0; j<n; j++) {
master_matrix[i][j] = 0;
}
}
// Calculate sub matrices no. of columns and displacements
int interval, modulus, section_end, section_start, section_length;
int counts[size];
int displs[size];
interval = n/size;
modulus = n % size;
for (int i=0; i < size; i++) {
if (modulus != 0) {
counts[i] = interval+1;
modulus--;
} else {
counts[i] = interval;
}
displs[i] = (i == 0) ? 0 : displs[i-1]+counts[i-1];
}
// Calculate subarray info
int master_size[2] = {n, n};
int subsize[2] = {n, counts[rank]};
int startat[2] = {0, displs[rank]};
// Populate sub matrix in main matrix
for (int i = startat[0]; i < startat[0] + subsize[0]; i++)
for (int j = startat[1]; j < startat[1] + subsize[1]; j++)
master_matrix[i][j] = rank + 1;
// Print adjusted matrix
// printf("ADJUSTED MATRIX\n");
// print_matrix(master_matrix, n, n);
// Create the subarray type for use by each send node (incl. the root):
MPI_Type_create_subarray(ndims, master_size, subsize, startat, MPI_ORDER_C,
MPI_DOUBLE, &sendsubarray);
MPI_Type_commit(&sendsubarray);
// Create the subarray type for use by the receive node (the root):
if (rank == 0) {
MPI_Type_create_subarray(ndims, master_size, subsize, startat, MPI_ORDER_C,
MPI_DOUBLE, &recvsubarray);
MPI_Type_commit(&recvsubarray);
MPI_Type_create_resized(recvsubarray, 0, 1 * sizeof(double),
&resizedrecvsubarray);
MPI_Type_commit(&resizedrecvsubarray);
}
// Gather the send matrices into the receive matrix:
MPI_Gatherv(master_matrix[0], 1, sendsubarray,
master_matrix[0], counts, displs, resizedrecvsubarray,
0, MPI_COMM_WORLD);
if (rank == 0) {
printf("FINAL MATRIX\n");
print_matrix(master_matrix, n, n);
}
MPI_Finalize();
}
Print all n! permutations of the number 1,2,3,...,n.
Example: Input: 3
Output: 1 2 3
1 3 2
2 1 3
2 3 1
3 1 2
3 2 1
Following is my approach. My program is not working for inputs greater than 3. I understand the logic why it is not working , but I am unable to translate that logic into a code block to overcome that issue.
#include <stdio.h>
int permute(int n)
{
int a[n];
int i,j,k,store;
for(i=0;i<n;i++)
a[i]=i+1;
for(i=1;i<=n;i++)
{
for(j=0;j<n-1;j++)
{
store=a[j+1];
a[j+1]=a[j];
a[j]=store;
for(k=0;k<n;k++)
printf("%d ",a[k]);
printf("\n");
}
}
}
int main()
{
int n;
scanf("%d",&n);
permute(n);
return 0;
}
Following is the output for n as 4:
We can clearly see that some permutation are missing, and I know exactly the fault in my code. But I am unable to fix it.( I am a beginner , hence I don't know much advanced C libraries or functions)
One solution consists in calling the function recursively: you set the first number (n possible choices), then call the function for a size n-1.
Output, for n=4
1 2 3 4
1 2 4 3
1 3 2 4
1 3 4 2
1 4 3 2
1 4 2 3
2 1 3 4
2 1 4 3
2 3 1 4
2 3 4 1
2 4 3 1
2 4 1 3
3 2 1 4
3 2 4 1
3 1 2 4
3 1 4 2
3 4 1 2
3 4 2 1
4 2 3 1
4 2 1 3
4 3 2 1
4 3 1 2
4 1 3 2
4 1 2 3
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void swap (int *i, int *j) {
int temp = *i;
*i = *j;
*j = temp;
}
void permute(int index, int* arr, int n) {
if (index == n-1) {
for (int k = 0; k < n; ++k) {
printf ("%d ", arr[k]);
}
printf ("\n");
return;
}
for (int i = index; i < n; i++) {
swap (arr + index, arr + i);
permute (index+1, arr, n);
swap (arr + i, arr + index);
}
return;
}
int main()
{
int n;
if (scanf("%d",&n) != 1) exit (1);
int arr[n];
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) arr[i] = i+1;
permute(0, arr, n);
return 0;
}
I want to generate all possible increasing subsequences of numbers (repetition allowed) from 1 to n, but of length k.
Ex. n=3, k=2
Output:
1 1
1 2
1 3
2 2
2 3
3 3
This is my code:
#include <stdio.h>
int s[100];
int n=6;
int k=4;
void subk(int prev,int index)
{
int i;
if (index==k)
{
for(int i=0; i<k; i++)
printf("%d ",s[i]);
printf("\n");
return;
}
s[index]=prev;
for (i=prev; i<=n; ++i)
{
subk(i,index+1);//,s,n,k);
}
}
int main()
{
int j;
for (j = 1; j<=n ; ++j)
{
subk(j,0);
}
return 0;
}
But this generates some unwanted repetitions. How do I eliminate those?
I have tested your code with n = 3 and k = 2 and got the following result:
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 2
1 2
1 3
2 2
2 2
2 3
3 3
This is obviously incorrect, as there are several identical numbers like 1 1 or 1 2.
But what exactly went wrong?
Let's write down the right results if n = 3 and k = 3. Now compare those to the result we got from the program when n = 3 and k = 2.
correct program (incorrect)
k = 3 k = 2
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 2 1 1
1 1 3 1 1
1 2 2 1 2
1 2 3 1 2
1 3 3 1 3
2 2 2 2 2
2 2 3 2 2
2 3 3 2 3
3 3 3 3 3
Now we can see that the incorrect output of the program is the same as the first two columns of the correct answer when we set k = 3. This means that the program solves the problem for 3 columns if we set k = 2, but only displays the first two columns.
You need to stop the program from writing the same number several times.
Solution 1
One way to do this is to execute the for-loop in the subk-function only once when it writes the last number (index == (k - 1)) into the buffer s.
In order to achieve this, you need to add the following two lines to the end of your for-loop.
if (index == (k - 1))
break;
(Instead of the break you could also use return)
After you added these two lines the function should look like this:
void subk(int prev, int index)
{
int i;
if (index == k)
{
for (int i = 0; i<k; i++)
printf("%d ", s[i]);
printf("\n");
return;
}
s[index] = prev;
for (i = prev; i <= n; ++i)
{
subk(i, index + 1);//,s,n,k);
if (index + 1 == k)
break;
}
}
Solution 2
Another way to solve the problem is to move the line s[index] = prev; to the beginning of the function and change the k in the if-statement to k - 1.
Now the function should look like this:
void subk(int prev, int index)
{
int i;
s[index] = prev;
if (index == k - 1)
{
for (int i = 0; i<k; i++)
printf("%d ", s[i]);
printf("\n");
return;
}
for (i = prev; i <= n; ++i)
{
subk(i, index + 1);//,s,n,k);
}
}
With this solution, the for-loop is never executed when the index shows that the program is at the last 'sub-number'. It just displays the number and exits the function because of the return.
You get the right result with both solutions, but I personally like the second solution better, because there is no additional if-statement that is executed every iteration of the for-loop and the program is (slightly) faster.
I am trying to get my program to count down after counting up to ten. I have tried to alter the code from counting up to make it count down to no avail.
#include <stdio.h>
void count(int k)
{
if (k > 0) {
count(-k + 1);
printf("%d", k);
}
else {
if (k == 0)
{
printf("%d,", k);
}
else {
count(k + 1);
printf("%d,", -k);
}
}
}
int main(int argc, char ** argv)
{
count(10);
getchar();
return 0;
}
Here is a simple example of the recursion which does this, illustrating Eugene's comment:
#include <stdio.h>
void count(int n) {
if (n > 10) {
printf("\n");
return;
}
printf("%d ", n);
count(n+1);
printf("%d ", n);
}
int main() {
count(0);
printf("\n");
return 0;
}
it counts up on the way into recursion and counts down while it exits it. Actually on the way down it only re-prints the state which it was before diving into the next level:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
The function can be easy implemented if to use a static local variable inside it. For example.
#include <stdio.h>
void count(unsigned int n)
{
static unsigned int m;
printf("%u ", m);
if (n != m)
{
++m;
count(n);
--m;
printf("%u ", m);
}
}
int main( void )
{
const unsigned int N = 10;
unsigned int i = 0;
do
{
count(i);
putchar('\n');
} while (i++ != N);
return 0;
}
The program output is
0
0 1 0
0 1 2 1 0
0 1 2 3 2 1 0
0 1 2 3 4 3 2 1 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Within the function the static variable m behaves as an index in a for loop (or there will be more suitable a do-while loop).
At first it is initialized implicitly by zero (as any static variable)
static unsigned int m;
You can use the initializer explicitly if you want
static unsigned int m = 0;
then it is changed from 0 to n and afterward backward from n again to 0.
++m; // changing from 0 to n
count(n);
--m; // changing from n to 0
Closed. This question is not reproducible or was caused by typos. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question was caused by a typo or a problem that can no longer be reproduced. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a way less likely to help future readers.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I am having trouble with implementing the sort function on pset3. I have used the GDB and found that my sort function does not sort anything. I am not sure if there is a syntax issue, or if the logic is a bit screwed up.
void sort(int values[], int n)
{
for (int k = 0; k < n; k++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < n; j++)
{
if (values[k] >= values[j])
{
int temp = values[k];
values[k] = values[j];
values[j] = temp;
}
}
}
}
You are close, but your loops are not quite right - change:
for (int k = 0; k < n; k++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < n; j++)
{
to:
for (int k = 0; k < n - 1; k++)
{
for (int j = k + 1; j < n; j++)
{
To understand why you need to make this change, consider that the inner loop (j) need only compare elements above index k with the current element at index k. So the outer loop (k) needs to iterate from 0 to n - 2 (one less than the last element), and for each outer loop iteration the inner loop needs to iterate from k + 1 (first element above k) to n - 1 (the last element).
NOTE: by pure chance it seems that the original code does appear to work correctly, even though it appears at first glance that it shouldn't. I have tested it with various edge cases and even though it performs many redundant swaps, the final result always seems to be sorted (suprisingly though the output is in descending order whereas the fixed code generates results in ascending order, as expected). Credit to Jonathan Leffler for spotting this - see his answer and demo program.
One other minor point -- this test:
if (values[k] >= values[j])
should really just be:
if (values[k] > values[j])
It's not incorrect as it stands (the code will still work), but there is no point in swapping elements that are equal, so it's somewhat inefficient as written.
I took your code and converted into a complete program. It's larger than an MCVE because it has support code for shuffling arrays, and for printing results, as well as a main() that exercises these, of course.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
static int rand_int(int n)
{
int limit = RAND_MAX - RAND_MAX % n;
int rnd;
while ((rnd = rand()) >= limit)
;
return rnd % n;
}
static void shuffle(int *array, int n)
{
for (int i = n - 1; i > 0; i--)
{
int j = rand_int(i + 1);
int tmp = array[j];
array[j] = array[i];
array[i] = tmp;
}
}
static void print_array(int n, int a[n])
{
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
printf(" %d", a[i]);
putchar('\n');
}
static void sort(int values[], int n)
{
for (int k = 0; k < n; k++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < n; j++)
{
if (values[k] >= values[j])
{
int temp = values[k];
values[k] = values[j];
values[j] = temp;
}
}
}
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
if (argc > 1)
{
long l = strtol(argv[1], 0, 0);
unsigned u = (unsigned)l;
printf("Seed: %u\n", u);
srand(u);
}
int data3[3] = { 3, 1, 2 };
print_array(3, data3);
sort(data3, 3);
print_array(3, data3);
int data5[5] = { 0, 2, 6, 1, 5, };
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
shuffle(data5, 5);
print_array(5, data5);
sort(data5, 5);
print_array(5, data5);
}
int data9[] = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 };
for (int i = 0; i < 9; i++)
{
shuffle(data9, 9);
print_array(9, data9);
sort(data9, 9);
print_array(9, data9);
}
return 0;
}
The shuffle code implements a Fisher-Yates shuffle, and is
based on code from an answer by Roland Illig. If invoked without a seed argument, it generates the same output each time.
Code compiled and tested on macOS Sierra 10.12.1 with GCC 6.2.0.
An example output:
Seed: 123456789
3 1 2
3 2 1
6 0 1 5 2
6 5 2 1 0
0 6 1 2 5
6 5 2 1 0
0 1 2 6 5
6 5 2 1 0
5 0 6 1 2
6 5 2 1 0
1 6 5 2 0
6 5 2 1 0
0 4 8 3 7 5 1 6 2
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
7 4 0 5 6 8 3 2 1
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
1 2 7 5 0 8 3 6 4
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
3 8 7 5 2 1 0 6 4
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
1 4 2 6 3 0 7 5 8
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
2 3 7 4 8 0 5 6 1
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
3 4 5 8 6 2 0 7 1
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
3 6 7 4 8 2 5 1 0
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
0 8 7 3 4 6 5 1 2
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
This shows the data being sorted in descending order every time, despite different randomized inputs.