PHP，使用MT:

$items_array = array("alpha", "bravo", "charlie");
$last_pos = count($items_array) - 1;
$random_pos = mt_rand(0, $last_pos);
$random_item = $items_array[$random_pos];

PHP，使用MT:

$items_array = array("alpha", "bravo", "charlie");
$last_pos = count($items_array) - 1;
$random_pos = mt_rand(0, $last_pos);
$random_item = $items_array[$random_pos];

Javascript解决方案;)

function choose (set) {
    return set[Math.floor(Math.random() * set.length)];
}

var set  = [1, 2, 3, 4], rand = choose (set);

或者:

Array.prototype.choose = function () {
    return this[Math.floor(Math.random() * this.length)];
};

[1, 2, 3, 4].choose();

不如就

public static <A> A getRandomElement(Collection<A> c, Random r) {
  return new ArrayList<A>(c).get(r.nextInt(c.size()));
}

对于番石榴，我们可以做得比霍斯的答案更好一点:

public static E random(Set<E> set) {
  int index = random.nextInt(set.size();
  if (set instanceof ImmutableSet) {
    // ImmutableSet.asList() is O(1), as is .get() on the returned list
    return set.asList().get(index);
  }
  return Iterables.get(set, index);
}

这比接受答案中的for-each循环要快:

int index = rand.nextInt(set.size());
Iterator<Object> iter = set.iterator();
for (int i = 0; i < index; i++) {
    iter.next();
}
return iter.next();

for-each构造在每次循环时调用Iterator.hasNext()，但由于index < set.size()，该检查是不必要的开销。我看到速度提高了10-20%，但是YMMV。(而且，编译时不需要添加额外的return语句。)

请注意，这段代码(以及大多数其他答案)可以应用于任何集合，而不仅仅是集合。通用方法形式:

public static <E> E choice(Collection<? extends E> coll, Random rand) {
    if (coll.size() == 0) {
        return null; // or throw IAE, if you prefer
    }

    int index = rand.nextInt(coll.size());
    if (coll instanceof List) { // optimization
        return ((List<? extends E>) coll).get(index);
    } else {
        Iterator<? extends E> iter = coll.iterator();
        for (int i = 0; i < index; i++) {
            iter.next();
        }
        return iter.next();
    }
}