根据Set集合的定义，Set中的元素是无序的。所以它们不能被索引访问。

但是为什么我们没有一个get(object)方法，不是通过提供索引作为参数，而是提供一个与我们正在寻找的对象相等的对象? 通过这种方式，我们可以访问Set中元素的数据，只需要知道equal方法使用的属性。

要获取Set中的元素，我使用以下命令:

public T getElement(Set<T> set, T element) {
T result = null;
if (set instanceof TreeSet<?>) {
    T floor = ((TreeSet<T>) set).floor(element);
    if (floor != null && floor.equals(element))
    result = floor;
} else {
    boolean found = false;
    for (Iterator<T> it = set.iterator(); !found && it.hasNext();) {
    if (true) {
        T current = it.next();
        if (current.equals(element)) {
        result = current;
        found = true;
        }
    }
    }
}
return result;
}

我遇到了这样的情况，我实际上想要一个通过索引访问的SortedSet(我同意其他海报，访问一个没有索引的无序集是没有意义的)。 例如，在树中，我希望对子节点进行排序，不允许重复子节点。

我需要通过索引访问来显示它们，set属性可以有效地消除重复。

在java中找不到合适的集合。util或谷歌集合，我发现它直接实现它自己。基本思想是包装SortedSet并在需要通过索引访问时创建一个List(并且在SortedSet被更改时忘记该列表)。当然，这只有在更改包装的SortedSet和在集合的生命周期中分离访问列表时才有效。否则它就像一个经常排序的列表，也就是说太慢了。

对于大量的子节点，这大大提高了我通过Collections.sort进行排序的列表的性能。

因为集合没有顺序。有些实现可以(特别是那些实现java.util.SortedSet接口的实现)，但这不是集合的一般属性。

如果您试图以这种方式使用集合，则应该考虑使用列表。

如果您不介意要排序的集合，那么您可能有兴趣看看索引树映射项目。

增强的TreeSet/TreeMap提供了通过索引访问元素或获取元素索引的功能。实现基于更新RB树中的节点权重。所以这里没有迭代，也没有列表备份。

我不确定是否有人这么说过，但你需要明白以下几点:

集合中没有“first”元素。

因为，正如其他人所说，集合没有顺序。集合是一个数学概念，特别不包括排序。

Of course, your computer can't really keep a list of stuff that's not ordered in memory. It has to have some ordering. Internally it's an array or a linked list or something. But you don't really know what it is, and it doesn't really have a first element; the element that comes out "first" comes out that way by chance, and might not be first next time. Even if you took steps to "guarantee" a particular first element, it's still coming out by chance, because you just happened to get it right for one particular implementation of a Set; a different implementation might not work that way with what you did. And, in fact, you may not know the implementation you're using as well as you think you do.

People run into this ALL. THE. TIME. with RDBMS systems and don't understand. An RDBMS query returns a set of records. This is the same type of set from mathematics: an unordered collection of items, only in this case the items are records. An RDBMS query result has no guaranteed order at all unless you use the ORDER BY clause, but all the time people assume it does and then trip themselves up some day when the shape of their data or code changes slightly and triggers the query optimizer to work a different way and suddenly the results don't come out in the order they expect. These are typically the people who didn't pay attention in database class (or when reading the documentation or tutorials) when it was explained to them, up front, that query results do not have a guaranteed ordering.