21

I have an array of Strings that are instances of a class from external code that I would rather not change.

I also have an array of ints that was generated by calling a function on each object. So I have

A: [string1, string2, string3]

And

B: [40, 32, 34]

How do I easily sort A such that it is sorted in by the values of B. I have boost available. I want to sort A such that it is in the order:

[string2, string3, string1]

In javascript you could do this like:

B.sort(function(a,b){return A[B.indexOf(a)] < A[B.indexOf(b)];});
4
  • 3
    Create a custom Comparator that first associates between value in A to value in B (in constructor) and use it to sort Commented Feb 17, 2015 at 6:44
  • 1
    Can you not just implement the same thing as your JavaScript example as a Comparator? Commented Feb 17, 2015 at 6:44
  • 1
    You need to write your custom Comparator. Commented Feb 17, 2015 at 6:46
  • You can also use TreeMap (Values in B as key and corresponding value in A as value), given that values in B are unique. Commented Feb 17, 2015 at 6:55

12 Answers 12

20

In java 8, you can do this

with a lambda:

    String[] strings = new String[]{"string1", "string2", "string3"};
    final int[] ints = new int[]{40, 32, 34};

    final List<String> stringListCopy = Arrays.asList(strings);
    ArrayList<String> sortedList = new ArrayList(stringListCopy);
    Collections.sort(sortedList, (left, right) -> ints[stringListCopy.indexOf(left)] - ints[stringListCopy.indexOf(right)]);

Or better, with Comparator:

    String[] strings = new String[]{"string1", "string2", "string3"};
    final int[] ints = new int[]{40, 32, 34};

    final List<String> stringListCopy = Arrays.asList(strings);
    ArrayList<String> sortedList = new ArrayList(stringListCopy);
    Collections.sort(sortedList, Comparator.comparing(s -> ints[stringListCopy.indexOf(s)]));
Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

4 Comments

This logic does not work for me with different examples, tested first use- case : please test on : String[] strings = new String[]{"string1", "string2", "string3", "string4"}; final int[] ints = new int[]{100,88, 98, 92}; got result: Array after sort[string2, string1, string4, string3] (but string1 should be in the end, can you explain or fix?
you need to copy to another array and base sort on array that does not change otherwise it will not work in other examples.
This algorithm is not efficient in terms of performance since every indexOf(s) runs in linear time to just find the index. So the worst-case performance is O(nnlogn), not O(n*logn)
Note that this won't work when there are duplicates in the list that don't correspond to the same value in the parallel array. For example with {"a", "b", "a", "c"}, {0, 3, 4, 2} both instances of "a" will be sorted to the front of the list (corresponding to 0) rather than one at the front and one at the end.
13

Short answer: I suggest that a separate class is created that holds the information about both the actual String and the boosting (the int). If you assume the following:

public class BoostString {
    int boost;
    String str;

    public BoostString(int boost, String str) {
        this.boost = boost;
        this.str = str;
    }
}

Then, you can sort your array by using a Comparator and it works especially nice with the Java 8 Streaming API.

String[] strings = {"string1", "string2", "string3"};
int[] boosts = {40, 32, 34};

final String[] sorted = IntStream.range(0, boosts.length)
        .mapToObj(i -> new BoostString(boosts[i], strings[i])) // Create the instance
        .sorted(Comparator.comparingInt(b -> b.boost))         // Sort using a Comparator
        .map(b -> b.str)                                       // Map it back to a string
        .toArray(String[]::new);                               // And return an array

The Comparator in the example above is created using the Comparator.comparingInt method which is a convenient way of creating a Comparator for ints using Java 8.


Explanation: Typically when comparing objects in Java you use one of the built-in sorting functions such as Collections.sort where you provide your own Comparator. The Comparator interface is straightforward and looks like this:

public interface Comparator<T> {
    int compare(T o1, T o2);

    // Other default methods for Java 8
}

The return value is of type int and is described like this in the JavaDoc:

return a negative integer, zero, or a positive integer as the first argument is less than, equal to, or greater than the second.

This works out-of-the-box when you are sorting Strings or int (or actually Integers) since they are Comparable – they sort of have a built-in natural sorting and for Strings this is in alphabetical order and for Integers this is sorted in ascending number order (see the JavaDoc for Comparable).

On a side note, there are other "pair" or "tuple" implementations available if you are using 3rd party libraries. You do not have to create your own "pair" of a String and int. One example is the Pair class from Apache Commons.

Comments

11

As @wassgren said, you can use streams, but you don't have to create a class, you can just use indexes:

String[] strings = {"string1", "string2", "string3"};
int[] boosts = {40, 32, 34};

String[] sorted = IntStream.range(0, boosts.length).boxed()
        .sorted(Comparator.comparingInt(i -> boosts[i]))
        .map(i -> strings[i])
        .toArray(String[]::new);

First you create a stream of indexes, then you sort them acording to boosts and then you get the string in that index.

4 Comments

This is by far the best answer. Maintains O(nlogn) performance, avoids the duplicates problem that the "indexOf" solutions all have, and avoids having to create and copy data into helper objects.
@pavon it sure is elegant and readable, but if you are really looking for performance (i.e. if executed billions of times) you won't get around benchmarking it. Streams have their own share of overhead and copying of data, and usually a non-streams solution is faster.
Does stream avoid using n additional space? As in the index i is constant space? Seems like calling sorted, then map would require allocating space for the index array. But maybe it all doesn't get executed until toArray? Seems like a hard compiler optimization problem.
@SvenVoigt As far as i know, you are correct, it would make an intermediate array of indices after calling sorted.
3

You can do something similar to your JS example in old style Java (but I would recommend joining your data together in an object as @wassgren suggests):

import java.util.*;

public class WeightSort {
  public static void main(String[] args) {
    String[] strings = new String[]{"string1", "string2", "string3"};
    final int[] weights = new int[]{40, 32, 34};
    final List<String> stringList = Arrays.asList(strings);
    List<String> sortedCopy = new ArrayList<String>(stringList);
    Collections.sort(sortedCopy, new Comparator<String>(){
        public int compare(String left, String right) {
          return weights[stringList.indexOf(left)] - weights[stringList.indexOf(right)];  
        }
      });
      System.out.println(sortedCopy);
  }
}

Comments

2

I solved this problem by using Comparator interface.

 import java.util.Comparator;
 import java.util.Collections;
 import java.util.List;
 import java.util.Arrays;


 public class ComparatorDemo {

 public static void main(String[] args) {
    List<Area> metaData = Arrays.asList(
            new Area("Joe", 24),
            new Area("Pete", 18),
            new Area("Chris", 21),
            new Area("Rose",21)
    );

    Collections.sort(metaData, new ResultComparator());
    for(int i =0 ;metaData.size()>i;i++)
             System.out.println(metaData.get(i).output);


  }
 }


 class ResultComparator implements Comparator<Area> {
     @Override
     public int compare(Area a, Area b) {
         return a.result < b.result ? -1 : a.result == b.result ? 0 : 1;
     }
 }

 class Area{
   String output;
   int result;

Area(String n, int a) {
    output = n;
    result = a;
     }
 }

1 Comment

error: MainActivity.ResultCompare is not abstract and does not override abstract method compare(Long,Long) in Comparator. class ResultCompare implements Comparator<Long>{
0

If you're constructing array B only to be used for this sorting, you can defer calculating it's values within A's compareTo(). In other words, calculate weights of strings only in comparisons during sorting.

Comments

0
package com.appkart.array;

import java.util.Comparator;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.TreeMap;

public class SortExample {

    Map<String, Integer> map = new HashMap<String, Integer>();
    Map<String, Integer> treemap = new TreeMap<String, Integer>(
            new MyComparator(map));

    public void addValueInMapAndSort() {
        map.put("string1", 40);
        map.put("string2", 32);
        map.put("string3", 34);

        System.out.println(map);
        treemap.putAll(map);
        System.out.println(treemap);
    }


    class MyComparator implements Comparator<String> {

        Map<String, Integer> map;

        public MyComparator(Map<String, Integer> map) {
            this.map = map;
        }

        @Override
        public int compare(String o1, String o2) {
            if (map.get(o1) >= map.get(o2)) {
                return 1;
            } else {
                return -1;
            }
        }
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SortExample example = new SortExample();
        example.addValueInMapAndSort();
    }
}

Use Comparator for sorting according to value.

Comments

0

I had a similar problem, and solved it by coding a sorting algorithm which sorted an array of measures, and made identical swaps in the array of objects. Here is the code, with tests, best wishes and no promises:

package other;

import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.Random;

/**
 * Sorts an array of objects (<code>bags</code>) by a separate array of doubles (<code>measures</code>). 
 * It sorts into ascending order. 
 * <p>
 * The <code>results</code> array is always a new array. 
 * <p>
 * The algorithm used:<ul>
 * <li> Is (I believe) a merge-sort, which would mean it is stable. (I haven't tested this.)
 * <li> Efficiently exploits already ordered subsequences. 
 * <li> Requires the allocation of eight arrays: four of the baggage type, four of doubles, each the length of the original data. 
 * </ul>
 * <p>
 * A <code>NaN</code> in the <code>measures</code> - I haven't thought about that, and don't want to. 
 * <p>
 * There is test code at the end of the class. 
 */
public class SortBaggageByDouble { 

    public final Object [] results ; 

    protected final int length ; 

    public SortBaggageByDouble(Object[] bags, double[] measures) { 
        this.length = bags.length; 
        if (bags.length!=measures.length) throw new IllegalArgumentException("Mismatched lengths: payload array "+bags.length+", measures array "+measures.length); 
        this.results = new Object[length]; 
        Object [] bagsA = new Object[length] ; 
        Object [] bagsB = new Object[length] ; 
        Object [] bagsC = new Object[length] ; 
        Object [] bagsD = new Object[length] ; 
        double [] measuresA = new double[length] ; 
        double [] measuresB = new double[length] ; 
        double [] measuresC = new double[length] ; 
        double [] measuresD = new double[length] ; 
        System.arraycopy(bags, 0, bagsA, 0, length); 
        System.arraycopy(measures, 0, measuresA, 0, length); 
        munge(length, 0, bagsA, bagsB, bagsC, bagsD, measuresA, measuresB, measuresC, measuresD); 
    }

    private void munge(int inLengthA, int inLengthB, Object[] inBagsA, Object[] inBagsB, Object[] outBagsC, Object[] outBagsD, double[] inMeasuresA, double[] inMeasuresB, double[] outMeasuresC, double[] outMeasuresD) { 
        int outLengthC = 0 ; 
        int outLengthD = 0 ; 
        int cursorA = 0 ; 
        int cursorB = 0 ; 
        boolean toC = true ; 
        while(outLengthC+outLengthD<length) { 
            boolean fromA ; 
            if (cursorA>=inLengthA) { 
                fromA = false ; 
            } else if (cursorB>=inLengthB) { 
                fromA = true ; 
            } else { 
                fromA = inMeasuresA[cursorA] <= inMeasuresB[cursorB] ;  
            } 
            double tmpMeasure = fromA ? inMeasuresA[cursorA] : inMeasuresB[cursorB] ; 
            Object tmpBag = fromA ? inBagsA[cursorA] : inBagsB[cursorB] ; 
            if (fromA) cursorA ++ ; else cursorB ++ ; 
            if (toC) { 
                if (outLengthC==0 || (outMeasuresC[outLengthC-1]<=tmpMeasure)) { 
                    outMeasuresC[outLengthC] = tmpMeasure ; 
                    outBagsC[outLengthC] = tmpBag ; 
                    outLengthC ++ ; 
                } else { 
                    toC = false ; 
                    outMeasuresD[outLengthD] = tmpMeasure ; 
                    outBagsD[outLengthD] = tmpBag ; 
                    outLengthD ++ ; 
                }
            } else { 
                if (outLengthD==0 || (outMeasuresD[outLengthD-1]<=tmpMeasure)) { 
                    outMeasuresD[outLengthD] = tmpMeasure ; 
                    outBagsD[outLengthD] = tmpBag ; 
                    outLengthD ++ ; 
                } else { 
                    toC = true ; 
                    outMeasuresC[outLengthC] = tmpMeasure ; 
                    outBagsC[outLengthC] = tmpBag ; 
                    outLengthC ++ ; 
                }
            }
        }
        if (outLengthC==length) { 
            System.arraycopy(outBagsC, 0, results, 0, length); 
        } else { 
            munge(outLengthC, outLengthD, outBagsC, outBagsD, inBagsA, inBagsB, outMeasuresC, outMeasuresD, inMeasuresA, inMeasuresB); 
        }
    }

    /**
     * Subclass to sort strings, with a result object <code>sortedStrings</code> which is of a useful type. 
     */
    public static class Strings extends SortBaggageByDouble { 

        public final String [] sortedStrings ; 

        public Strings(String[] in, double[] measures) {
            super(in, measures);
            this.sortedStrings = new String[results.length]; 
            for (int i=0 ; i<results.length ; i++) sortedStrings[i] = (String) results[i] ; 
        } 

    }

    /**
     * Tests sorting - assumes there are no duplicates among the measures. 
     */
    private static class NoDuplicatesTest { 
        private NoDuplicatesTest(String[] shuffledStrings, double[] shuffledMeasures, String[] expectedStrings) { 
            SortBaggageByDouble.Strings sorter = new SortBaggageByDouble.Strings(shuffledStrings, shuffledMeasures); 
            if (!Arrays.equals(expectedStrings, sorter.sortedStrings)) throw new RuntimeException("Test failed"); 
        }
    }

    private static class MultiseedNoDuplicatesTest { 
        private MultiseedNoDuplicatesTest(String[] orderedStrings, double[] orderedMeasures, int[] seeds) { 
            int length = orderedStrings.length;
            for (int seed : seeds) { 
                Random random = new Random(seed); 
                int [] shuffleIndices = new int[length] ; 
                for (int i=0 ; i<length ; i++) shuffleIndices[i] = i ; 
                for (int i=1 ; i<length ; i++) { 
                    int j = random.nextInt(i+1); // 'j' is in the range 0..i, bounds inclusive. 
                    int tmp = shuffleIndices[i]; 
                    shuffleIndices[i] = shuffleIndices[j] ; 
                    shuffleIndices[j] = tmp ; 
                }
                String[] shuffledStrings = new String[length]; 
                double[] shuffledMeasures = new double[length]; 
                for (int i=0 ; i<length ; i++) { 
                    shuffledStrings[shuffleIndices[i]] = orderedStrings[i] ; 
                    shuffledMeasures[shuffleIndices[i]] = orderedMeasures[i] ; 
                }
                if (false && 0<length && length<8) { 
                    System.out.println("shuffleIndices is "+ stringfor(shuffleIndices)); 
                    System.out.println("shuffledStrings is "+ stringfor(shuffledStrings)); 
                    System.out.println("shuffledMeasures is "+ stringfor(shuffledMeasures)); 
                }
                new NoDuplicatesTest(shuffledStrings, shuffledMeasures, orderedStrings); 
            }
        }
    }

    private static class MultilengthMultiseedNoDuplicatesTest { 
        MultilengthMultiseedNoDuplicatesTest(int[] lengths, int[] seeds) { 
            for (int i=0 ; i<lengths.length ; i++) { 
                int length = lengths[i] ; 
                String[] orderedStrings = new String[length] ; 
                double[] orderedMeasures = new double[length] ; 
                for (int j=0 ; j<length ; j++) { 
                    orderedStrings[j] = "_"+j+"_" ; 
                    orderedMeasures[j] = j ; 
                }
                if (false && 0<length && length<8) { 
                    System.out.println("orderedStrings is "+ stringfor(orderedStrings)); 
                    System.out.println("orderedMeasures is "+ stringfor(orderedMeasures)); 
                }
                new MultiseedNoDuplicatesTest(orderedStrings, orderedMeasures, seeds); 
            }

        }
    }

    public static class ClassTest { 
        ClassTest() { 
            new MultilengthMultiseedNoDuplicatesTest(new int[]{0}, new int[]{8543, 45125}); 
            new MultilengthMultiseedNoDuplicatesTest(new int[]{1}, new int[]{8543, 45125}); 
            new MultilengthMultiseedNoDuplicatesTest(new int[]{2}, new int[]{8543, 45125, 4545, 785413}); 
            new MultilengthMultiseedNoDuplicatesTest(new int[]{3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10}, new int[]{8543, 45125, 4545, 785413}); 
            new MultilengthMultiseedNoDuplicatesTest(new int[]{50, 100, 1000}, new int[]{474854, 43233}); 
            //////  Passed! Bye bye.  
            System.out.println("Passed test suite "+this.getClass().getCanonicalName()); 
        }
    }

    public static String stringfor(int[] array) {
        StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(); 
        build(sb, array);
        return sb.toString();
    }

    public static void build(StringBuilder sb, int[] array) { 
        for (int i=0 ; i<array.length ; i++) { 
            if (sb.length()>0) sb.append(' '); 
            sb.append(array[i]); 
        } 
    }

    public static String stringfor(double[] array) {
        StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(); 
        build(sb, array);
        return sb.toString();
    }

    public static void build(StringBuilder sb, double[] array) { 
        for (int i=0 ; i<array.length ; i++) { 
            if (sb.length()>0) sb.append(' '); 
            sb.append(array[i]); 
        } 
    }

    public static String stringfor(String[] labels) {
        StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
        String sep = "" ; 
        for (int i=0 ; i<labels.length ; i++) { 
            sb.append(sep); 
            String label = labels[i] ; 
            sb.append(label!=null ? label : "null"); 
            sep = ", " ; 
        }
        return sb.toString();
    }

}

Comments

0

Maybe not exactly for that case, but for those who looking for answer how to sort one array of String based on another:

// Array of values, in a order of sorting
static final Map<String, Integer> ROUNDS_SORT = new HashMap<String, Integer>();
static {
    ROUNDS_SORT.put("f", 0);
    ROUNDS_SORT.put("s", 1);
    ROUNDS_SORT.put("q", 2);
    ROUNDS_SORT.put("r16", 3);
    ROUNDS_SORT.put("r32", 4);
    ROUNDS_SORT.put("r64", 5);
}

// Your array to be sorted
static ArrayList<String> rounds = new ArrayList<String>() {{
    add("f");
    add("q");
    add("q");
    add("r16");
    add("f");
}};

// implement
public List<String> getRoundsSorted() {
    Collections.sort(rounds, new Comparator<String>() {
        @Override
        public int compare(String p1, String p2) {
            return Integer.valueOf(ROUNDS_SORT.get(p1)).compareTo(Integer.valueOf(ROUNDS_SORT.get(p2)));
        }
    });
    return rounds;
}

Comments

0

In java you need to have two arrays one copy to sort off and the array you want to sort.

with a lambda:

String[] strings = new String[]{"string1", "string2", "string3", "string4"};
final int[] ints = new int[]{100, 88, 92, 98};

final List<String> stringListCopy = Arrays.asList(strings);
ArrayList<String> sortedList = new ArrayList(stringListCopy);
Collections.sort(sortedList, (left, right) -> ints[stringListCopy.indexOf(left)] - ints[stringListCopy.indexOf(right)]);

Or with Comparator:

String[] strings = new String[]{"string1", "string2", "string3", "string4"};
final int[] ints = new int[]{100, 92, 88, 98};

final List<String> stringListCopy = Arrays.asList(strings);
ArrayList<String> sortedList = new ArrayList(stringListCopy);
Collections.sort(sortedList, Comparator.comparing(s -> ints[stringListCopy.indexOf(s)]));

Comments

0

Create an array of longs with the top 32 bits being the sorting integers and the bottom 32 bits being the array indexes. Sort that array then use the now sorted indexes to build a sorted string array.

    String[] strings = new String[]{"string1", "string2", "string3"};
    final int[] ints = new int[]{40, 32, 34};

    final long[] longs = new long[ints.length];
    for (int i = 0; i < ints.length; i++) {
        longs[i] = (long)ints[i] << 32 | (long)i;
    }
    Arrays.sort(longs);

    String[] sortedStrings = new String[strings.length];
    for(int i = 0; i < longs.length; i++) {
        sortedStrings[i] = strings[(int)longs[i]];
    }

    System.out.println(Arrays.asList(sortedStrings));

I believe this is algorithmically the same as Ofek's stream-based solution above, but uses more traditional Java.

A feature of the algorithm is that if two entries have the same sorting integer they will retain their original sequences with respect to each other.

Comments

-2

Make a TreeMap<Integer, List<ObjectTypeFromA>> where the map key is the values in B, and the map values are the values in A (using a list to allow for duplicate keys). It will be sorted in the order of B by definition.

public static void main(String[] args) {
  String[] strings = { "string1", "string2", "string3", "string4" };
  int[] ints = { 40, 32, 32, 34 };
  System.out.println(Arrays.toString(getSortedStringArray(strings, ints)));
}

public static String[] getSortedStringArray(String[] strings, int[] order) {
  Map<Integer, List<String>> map = new TreeMap<>();
  for (int i = 0; i < strings.length; i++) {
    if (!map.containsKey(order[i])) {
      map.put(order[i], new LinkedList<String>());
    }
    map.get(order[i]).add(strings[i]);
  }
  String[] ret = new String[strings.length];
  int i = 0;
  for (Map.Entry<Integer, List<String>> mapEntry : map.entrySet()) {
    for (String s : mapEntry.getValue()) {
      ret[i++] = s;
    }
  }
  return ret;
}

5 Comments

What if B has duplicates?
I have duplication issue. Treemap isn't working here.
Then make the value a Collection of objects, and create a wrapper that when iterating the tree in order, will also iterate through the contents of each collection. I will update answer shortly. You should probably update question to specify that duplicates are allowed; your example does not bring that possibility to mind.
@Reza updated answer to show how this concept still works fine with duplicate keys and a slight modification.
@DeepakTiwari updated answer handles duplicates, see int[] ints = { 40, 32, 32, 34 };

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.