给定一个集合,有没有办法得到该集合的最后N个元素?如果框架中没有方法,那么编写一个扩展方法来实现这个目的的最佳方式是什么?
当前回答
以下是我的解决方案:
public static class EnumerationExtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<T> TakeLast<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input, int count)
{
if (count <= 0)
yield break;
var inputList = input as IList<T>;
if (inputList != null)
{
int last = inputList.Count;
int first = last - count;
if (first < 0)
first = 0;
for (int i = first; i < last; i++)
yield return inputList[i];
}
else
{
// Use a ring buffer. We have to enumerate the input, and we don't know in advance how many elements it will contain.
T[] buffer = new T[count];
int index = 0;
count = 0;
foreach (T item in input)
{
buffer[index] = item;
index = (index + 1) % buffer.Length;
count++;
}
// The index variable now points at the next buffer entry that would be filled. If the buffer isn't completely
// full, then there are 'count' elements preceding index. If the buffer *is* full, then index is pointing at
// the oldest entry, which is the first one to return.
//
// If the buffer isn't full, which means that the enumeration has fewer than 'count' elements, we'll fix up
// 'index' to point at the first entry to return. That's easy to do; if the buffer isn't full, then the oldest
// entry is the first one. :-)
//
// We'll also set 'count' to the number of elements to be returned. It only needs adjustment if we've wrapped
// past the end of the buffer and have enumerated more than the original count value.
if (count < buffer.Length)
index = 0;
else
count = buffer.Length;
// Return the values in the correct order.
while (count > 0)
{
yield return buffer[index];
index = (index + 1) % buffer.Length;
count--;
}
}
}
public static IEnumerable<T> SkipLast<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input, int count)
{
if (count <= 0)
return input;
else
return input.SkipLastIter(count);
}
private static IEnumerable<T> SkipLastIter<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input, int count)
{
var inputList = input as IList<T>;
if (inputList != null)
{
int first = 0;
int last = inputList.Count - count;
if (last < 0)
last = 0;
for (int i = first; i < last; i++)
yield return inputList[i];
}
else
{
// Aim to leave 'count' items in the queue. If the input has fewer than 'count'
// items, then the queue won't ever fill and we return nothing.
Queue<T> elements = new Queue<T>();
foreach (T item in input)
{
elements.Enqueue(item);
if (elements.Count > count)
yield return elements.Dequeue();
}
}
}
}
代码有点粗,但作为一个可重用的插入组件,它应该在大多数场景中表现得很好,并且它将使使用它的代码保持良好和简洁。: -)
我的TakeLast for non-IList ' 1是基于与@Mark Byers和@MackieChan回答中相同的环形缓冲算法。有趣的是,它们是如此相似——我是完全独立写的。我猜只有一种方法可以正确地使用环形缓冲区。: -)
看看@kbrimington的答案,可以为IQuerable<T>添加一个额外的检查,以回到与实体框架一起工作的方法——假设我在这一点上没有。
其他回答
.NET Core 2.0+提供了LINQ方法TakeLast():
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.linq.enumerable.takelast
例子:
Enumerable
.Range(1, 10)
.TakeLast(3) // <--- takes last 3 items
.ToList()
.ForEach(i => System.Console.WriteLine(i))
// outputs:
// 8
// 9
// 10
下面是如何从一个集合(数组)中获取最后3个元素的实际示例:
// split address by spaces into array
string[] adrParts = adr.Split(new string[] { " " },StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);
// take only 3 last items in array
adrParts = adrParts.SkipWhile((value, index) => { return adrParts.Length - index > 3; }).ToArray();
我知道现在回答这个问题已经太晚了。但是,如果您正在处理类型为IList<>的集合,并且您不关心返回集合的顺序,那么此方法工作得更快。我使用了Mark Byers的答案并做了一些改变。TakeLast方法是:
public static IEnumerable<T> TakeLast<T>(IList<T> source, int takeCount)
{
if (source == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("source"); }
if (takeCount < 0) { throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("takeCount", "must not be negative"); }
if (takeCount == 0) { yield break; }
if (source.Count > takeCount)
{
for (int z = source.Count - 1; takeCount > 0; z--)
{
takeCount--;
yield return source[z];
}
}
else
{
for(int i = 0; i < source.Count; i++)
{
yield return source[i];
}
}
}
我用Mark Byers的方法和kbrimington的方法进行测试。这是测试:
IList<int> test = new List<int>();
for(int i = 0; i<1000000; i++)
{
test.Add(i);
}
Stopwatch stopwatch = new Stopwatch();
stopwatch.Start();
IList<int> result = TakeLast(test, 10).ToList();
stopwatch.Stop();
Stopwatch stopwatch1 = new Stopwatch();
stopwatch1.Start();
IList<int> result1 = TakeLast2(test, 10).ToList();
stopwatch1.Stop();
Stopwatch stopwatch2 = new Stopwatch();
stopwatch2.Start();
IList<int> result2 = test.Skip(Math.Max(0, test.Count - 10)).Take(10).ToList();
stopwatch2.Stop();
下面是取10个元素的结果:
取1000001个元素的结果为:
我试图将效率和简单性结合起来,最后得到了这样的结果:
public static IEnumerable<T> TakeLast<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source, int count)
{
if (source == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("source"); }
Queue<T> lastElements = new Queue<T>();
foreach (T element in source)
{
lastElements.Enqueue(element);
if (lastElements.Count > count)
{
lastElements.Dequeue();
}
}
return lastElements;
}
关于 在c#中,Queue<T>是使用循环缓冲区实现的,因此每次循环都没有对象实例化(只有当队列增长时)。我没有设置队列容量(使用专用构造函数),因为有人可能使用count = int调用此扩展。MaxValue。为了获得额外的性能,您可以检查源实现IList是否<T>,如果是,则直接使用数组索引提取最后的值。
注意:我错过了你的问题标题说使用Linq,所以我的回答实际上没有使用Linq。
如果希望避免缓存整个集合的非惰性副本,可以编写一个使用链表的简单方法。
下面的方法将把它在原始集合中找到的每个值添加到一个链表中,并将链表修剪到所需的项数。由于它通过遍历集合一直将链表修剪为这个数量的项,因此它只保留原始集合中最多N个项的副本。
它不要求您知道原始集合中项目的数量,也不需要对其进行多次迭代。
用法:
IEnumerable<int> sequence = Enumerable.Range(1, 10000);
IEnumerable<int> last10 = sequence.TakeLast(10);
...
扩展方法:
public static class Extensions
{
public static IEnumerable<T> TakeLast<T>(this IEnumerable<T> collection,
int n)
{
if (collection == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(collection));
if (n < 0)
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(nameof(n), $"{nameof(n)} must be 0 or greater");
LinkedList<T> temp = new LinkedList<T>();
foreach (var value in collection)
{
temp.AddLast(value);
if (temp.Count > n)
temp.RemoveFirst();
}
return temp;
}
}