我创建了一个时间复杂度为o(n)的高阶函数。另外，像map这样的功能可以返回您想要的任何类型。

extension Sequence {
    func distinct<T,U>(_ provider: (Element) -> (U, T)) -> [T] where U: Hashable {
        var uniqueKeys = Set<U>()
        var distintValues = [T]()
        for object in self {
            let transformed = provider(object)
            if !uniqueKeys.contains(transformed.0) {
                distintValues.append(transformed.1)
                uniqueKeys.insert(transformed.0)
            }
        }
        return distintValues
    }
}

首先将数组的所有元素添加到NSOrderedSet中。 这将删除数组中的所有重复项。 再次将这个orderedset转换为一个数组。

做……

例子

let array = [1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,4,6,8]

let orderedSet : NSOrderedSet = NSOrderedSet(array: array)

let arrayWithoutDuplicates : NSArray = orderedSet.array as NSArray

输出arraywithoutduplates - [1,2,4,6,8]

如果你把两个扩展都放在你的代码中，更快的Hashable版本将在可能的情况下使用，Equatable版本将用作备用版本。

public extension Sequence where Element: Hashable {
  /// The elements of the sequence, with duplicates removed.
  /// - Note: Has equivalent elements to `Set(self)`.
  @available(
  swift, deprecated: 5.4,
  message: "Doesn't compile without the constant in Swift 5.3."
  )
  var firstUniqueElements: [Element] {
    let getSelf: (Element) -> Element = \.self
    return firstUniqueElements(getSelf)
  }
}

public extension Sequence where Element: Equatable {
  /// The elements of the sequence, with duplicates removed.
  /// - Note: Has equivalent elements to `Set(self)`.
  @available(
  swift, deprecated: 5.4,
  message: "Doesn't compile without the constant in Swift 5.3."
  )
  var firstUniqueElements: [Element] {
    let getSelf: (Element) -> Element = \.self
    return firstUniqueElements(getSelf)
  }
}

public extension Sequence {
  /// The elements of the sequences, with "duplicates" removed
  /// based on a closure.
  func firstUniqueElements<Hashable: Swift.Hashable>(
    _ getHashable: (Element) -> Hashable
  ) -> [Element] {
    var set: Set<Hashable> = []
    return filter { set.insert(getHashable($0)).inserted }
  }

  /// The elements of the sequence, with "duplicates" removed,
  /// based on a closure.
  func firstUniqueElements<Equatable: Swift.Equatable>(
    _ getEquatable: (Element) -> Equatable
  ) -> [Element] {
    reduce(into: []) { uniqueElements, element in
      if zip(
        uniqueElements.lazy.map(getEquatable),
        AnyIterator { [equatable = getEquatable(element)] in equatable }
      ).allSatisfy(!=) {
        uniqueElements.append(element)
      }
    }
  }
}

如果顺序不重要，那么你总是可以使用这个Set初始化式。

如果你需要值排序，这是工作(Swift 4)

let sortedValues = Array(Set(Array)).sorted()

像函数式程序员一样思考:)

要根据元素是否已经出现来筛选列表，需要索引。可以使用enumeration获取索引，并使用map返回值列表。

let unique = myArray
    .enumerated()
    .filter{ myArray.firstIndex(of: $0.1) == $0.0 }
    .map{ $0.1 }

这保证了秩序。如果你不介意顺序，那么Array(Set(myArray))的现有答案更简单，可能更有效。

更新:一些关于效率和正确性的注意事项

一些人对效率进行了评论。我肯定是先写正确而简单的代码，然后再找出瓶颈，尽管我知道这是否比Array(Set(Array))更清楚是有争议的。

这个方法比Array(Set(Array))慢很多。正如评论中所指出的，它确实保持了顺序，并对非Hashable的元素起作用。

然而，@Alain T的方法也保持了秩序，也快得多。所以除非你的元素类型是不可哈希的，或者你只是需要一个快速的一行，那么我建议采用他们的解决方案。

以下是MacBook Pro(2014)在Xcode 11.3.1 (Swift 5.1)发布模式下的一些测试。

profiler函数和两个比较方法:

func printTimeElapsed(title:String, operation:()->()) {
    var totalTime = 0.0
    for _ in (0..<1000) {
        let startTime = CFAbsoluteTimeGetCurrent()
        operation()
        let timeElapsed = CFAbsoluteTimeGetCurrent() - startTime
        totalTime += timeElapsed
    }
    let meanTime = totalTime / 1000
    print("Mean time for \(title): \(meanTime) s")
}

func method1<T: Hashable>(_ array: Array<T>) -> Array<T> {
    return Array(Set(array))
}

func method2<T: Equatable>(_ array: Array<T>) -> Array<T>{
    return array
    .enumerated()
    .filter{ array.firstIndex(of: $0.1) == $0.0 }
    .map{ $0.1 }
}

// Alain T.'s answer (adapted)
func method3<T: Hashable>(_ array: Array<T>) -> Array<T> {
    var uniqueKeys = Set<T>()
    return array.filter{uniqueKeys.insert($0).inserted}
}

以及少量的测试输入:

func randomString(_ length: Int) -> String {
  let letters = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"
  return String((0..<length).map{ _ in letters.randomElement()! })
}

let shortIntList = (0..<100).map{_ in Int.random(in: 0..<100) }
let longIntList = (0..<10000).map{_ in Int.random(in: 0..<10000) }
let longIntListManyRepetitions = (0..<10000).map{_ in Int.random(in: 0..<100) }
let longStringList = (0..<10000).map{_ in randomString(1000)}
let longMegaStringList = (0..<10000).map{_ in randomString(10000)}

给出输出:

Mean time for method1 on shortIntList: 2.7358531951904296e-06 s
Mean time for method2 on shortIntList: 4.910230636596679e-06 s
Mean time for method3 on shortIntList: 6.417632102966309e-06 s
Mean time for method1 on longIntList: 0.0002518167495727539 s
Mean time for method2 on longIntList: 0.021718120217323302 s
Mean time for method3 on longIntList: 0.0005312927961349487 s
Mean time for method1 on longIntListManyRepetitions: 0.00014377200603485108 s
Mean time for method2 on longIntListManyRepetitions: 0.0007293639183044434 s
Mean time for method3 on longIntListManyRepetitions: 0.0001843773126602173 s
Mean time for method1 on longStringList: 0.007168249964714051 s
Mean time for method2 on longStringList: 0.9114790915250778 s
Mean time for method3 on longStringList: 0.015888616919517515 s
Mean time for method1 on longMegaStringList: 0.0525397013425827 s
Mean time for method2 on longMegaStringList: 1.111266262292862 s
Mean time for method3 on longMegaStringList: 0.11214958941936493 s

斯威夫特2

用uniq函数回答:

func uniq<S: SequenceType, E: Hashable where E==S.Generator.Element>(source: S) -> [E] {
    var seen: [E:Bool] = [:]
    return source.filter({ (v) -> Bool in
        return seen.updateValue(true, forKey: v) == nil
    })
}

use:

var test = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,9,9,9,9,9]
print(uniq(test)) //1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9