我注意到在有效的STL
向量是这样一种序列 默认情况下应该使用。
这是什么意思?似乎忽略效率向量可以做任何事情。
谁能给我一个场景,其中向量不是一个可行的选择,但必须使用列表?
我注意到在有效的STL
向量是这样一种序列 默认情况下应该使用。
这是什么意思?似乎忽略效率向量可以做任何事情。
谁能给我一个场景,其中向量不是一个可行的选择,但必须使用列表?
当前回答
当你在序列中间有很多插入或删除时。例如,内存管理器。
其他回答
我班上的学生似乎无法向我解释什么时候使用向量更有效,但他们在建议我使用列表时看起来很高兴。
这是我的理解
列表: 每一项都包含下一个或上一个元素的地址,所以有了这个功能,你可以随机项,即使它们没有排序,顺序也不会改变:如果你的内存是碎片化的,它是有效的。 但是它还有一个非常大的优势:你可以很容易地插入/删除项,因为你唯一需要做的就是改变一些指针。 缺点: 要读一个随机的条目,你必须从一个条目跳到另一个条目,直到你找到正确的地址。
Vectors: When using vectors, the memory is much more organized like regular arrays: each n-th items is stored just after (n-1)th item and before (n+1)th item. Why is it better than list ? Because it allow fast random access. Here is how: if you know the size of an item in a vector, and if they are contiguous in memory, you can easily predict where the n-th item is; you don't have to browse all the item of a list to read the one you want, with vector, you directly read it, with a list you can't. On the other hand, modify the vector array or change a value is much more slow.
列表更适合用于跟踪可以在内存中添加/删除的对象。 当您希望从大量单个项中访问一个元素时,向量更适合。
我不知道列表是如何优化的,但你必须知道,如果你想要快速读取访问,你应该使用向量,因为STL固定列表有多好,它在读取访问方面不会像向量那样快。
std::vector | std::list |
---|---|
Contiguous memory. | Non-contiguous memory. |
Pre-allocates space for future elements, so extra space required beyond what's necessary for the elements themselves. | No pre-allocated memory. The memory overhead for the list itself is constant. |
Each element only requires the space for the element type itself (no extra pointers). | Each element requires extra space for the node which holds the element, including pointers to the next and previous elements in the list. |
Can re-allocate memory for the entire vector any time that you add an element. | Never has to re-allocate memory for the whole list just because you add an element. |
Insertions at the end are constant, amortized time, but insertions elsewhere are a costly O(n). | Insertions and erasures are cheap no matter where in the list they occur. |
Erasures at the end of the vector are constant time, but for the rest it's O(n). | It's cheap to combine lists with splicing. |
You can randomly access its elements. | You cannot randomly access elements, so getting at a particular element in the list can be expensive. |
Iterators are invalidated if you add or remove elements to or from the vector. | Iterators remain valid even when you add or remove elements from the list. |
You can easily get at the underlying array if you need an array of the elements. | If you need an array of the elements, you'll have to create a new one and add them all to it, since there is no underlying array. |
一般来说,当你不关心你使用的是哪种类型的顺序容器时,使用vector,但如果你在容器的任何地方做很多插入或擦除,而不是在末尾,你就会想要使用list。如果你需要随机访问,你就需要向量,而不是列表。除此之外,在某些情况下,根据应用程序需要其中一个或另一个,但一般来说,这些都是很好的指导原则。
当你想在容器之间移动对象时,你可以使用list::splice。
例如,一个图划分算法可以将常数数量的对象递归地划分到数量不断增加的容器中。对象应该初始化一次,并始终保持在内存中的相同位置。通过重新链接来重新排列比重新分配要快得多。
Edit: as libraries prepare to implement C++0x, the general case of splicing a subsequence into a list is becoming linear complexity with the length of the sequence. This is because splice (now) needs to iterate over the sequence to count the number of elements in it. (Because the list needs to record its size.) Simply counting and re-linking the list is still faster than any alternative, and splicing an entire list or a single element are special cases with constant complexity. But, if you have long sequences to splice, you might have to dig around for a better, old-fashioned, non-compliant container.
任何时候都不能使迭代器失效。
这里的大多数答案都遗漏了一个重要的细节:为什么?
你想在集装箱里放些什么?
如果它是int型的集合,那么std::list在任何情况下都将丢失,不管你是否可以重新分配,你只从前面删除,等等。遍历列表的速度较慢,每次插入都需要与分配器进行交互。要准备一个例子是极其困难的,其中list<int>击败vector<int>。即使这样,deque<int>可能更好或关闭,而不仅仅是使用列表,这将有更大的内存开销。
然而,如果您正在处理大而丑陋的数据块——而且数量很少——您不想在插入时过度分配,而由于重新分配而进行复制将是一场灾难——那么您可能,也许,使用list<UglyBlob>比使用vector<UglyBlob>更好。
不过,如果你切换到vector<UglyBlob*>或甚至vector<shared_ptr<UglyBlob> >, - list仍然会滞后。
因此,访问模式、目标元素数量等仍然会影响比较,但在我看来,元素大小、复制成本等。